231,276
edits
User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-6032121-20200517150418/@comment-45692830-20200520204143: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-6032121-20200517150418/@comment-45692830-20200520204143 (edit)
Revision as of 00:04, 28 April 2023
, 28 April 2023Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7/-/-)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Let's consider his second comment there. What is he responding to? He's responding to you listing a set of stories that need to be reclassified. And he's saying "wait, no, some of these don't need to be reclassified, they can go on one of these lists because they're BBC products". This is, again, '''not an endorsement of your proposed solution'''. It's merely pointing out that within your proposed solution you had made a mistake. | Let's consider his second comment there. What is he responding to? He's responding to you listing a set of stories that need to be reclassified. And he's saying "wait, no, some of these don't need to be reclassified, they can go on one of these lists because they're BBC products". This is, again, '''not an endorsement of your proposed solution'''. It's merely pointing out that within your proposed solution you had made a mistake. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 8: | ||
Obviously this exchange took place before the thread, but in context with the quote, well. Look. The point is this. Consensus clearly does not exist. At best consensus exists that some split should happen, but people do not agree on how the split should be handled. To say otherwise is just a misrepresentation of the thread. There's still a lot of things people can discuss, even if some of them might be better served in a new thread related to validity of Lockdown! stories more generally. | Obviously this exchange took place before the thread, but in context with the quote, well. Look. The point is this. Consensus clearly does not exist. At best consensus exists that some split should happen, but people do not agree on how the split should be handled. To say otherwise is just a misrepresentation of the thread. There's still a lot of things people can discuss, even if some of them might be better served in a new thread related to validity of Lockdown! stories more generally. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20200517150418-6032121/20200520204143-45692830]]</noinclude> | ||
