[001]
SchizoTechnician
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I said I admit that I was biased. I readily admit that \'\'some\'\' of what I put in- particularly the ScienceMovesOn bit, as I realize now- was wrong. I am sorry for that. I am not sorry for the rest, though. I maintain that you were \'\'equally\'\' wrong, in the opposite direction, for two reasons. One, FastEddie did note that you were getting rid of perfectly valid trope examples, such as BrokenBase- and I only got vitriolic when you kept removing a perfectly valid example that, as far as I could tell, was the best example of that trope around, rather than a marginal example. Two, the article had humor in it before. While I admit that it may have gone a bit too far at points, I personally think it went too far in the other direction now- it takes the bits important to people as important now, yes, but you also can\'t have \'\'any\'\' jokes in it; I wasn\'t trying to make fun, I was trying to get a \'\'laugh\'\', since I\'d seen this as one of the funnier pages before you made its position neutral. SeriousBusiness I agree with totally- but to see SeriousBusiness as a reason for removing any attempts at humor is unforgivable; I went to a hebrew day school in my youth and to say that they didn\'t joke around would be \'\'lying\'\'. I may have gone several miles too far in the not-serious direction (again, barring the science moves on thing, which I admit crossed the line), but only because \'\'nobody else was trying to go in the not-serious direction at all\'\'.
to:
I said I admit that I was biased. I readily admit that \\\'\\\'some\\\'\\\' of what I put in- particularly the ScienceMovesOn bit, as I realize now- was wrong. I am sorry for that. I am not sorry for the rest, though. I maintain that you were \\\'\\\'equally\\\'\\\' wrong, in the opposite direction, for two reasons. One, FastEddie did note that you were getting rid of perfectly valid trope examples, such as BrokenBase- and I only got vitriolic when you kept removing a perfectly valid example that, as far as I could tell, was the best example of that trope around, rather than a marginal example. Two, the article had humor in it before. While I admit that it may have gone a bit too far at points, I personally think it went too far in the other direction now- it takes the bits important to people as important now, yes, but you also can\\\'t have \\\'\\\'any\\\'\\\' jokes in it; I wasn\\\'t trying to make fun, I was trying to get a \\\'\\\'laugh\\\'\\\', since I\\\'d seen this as one of the funnier pages before you made its position neutral. SeriousBusiness I agree with totally- but to see SeriousBusiness as a reason for removing any attempts at humor is unforgivable; I went to a hebrew day school in my youth and to say that they didn\\\'t joke around would be \\\'\\\'lying\\\'\\\'. I may have gone several miles too far in the not-serious direction (again, barring the science moves on thing, which I admit crossed the line), but only because \\\'\\\'nobody else was trying to go in the not-serious direction at all\\\'\\\'- I kept changing the babel entry becuase I wanted the phrasing and reference to be humorous, rather than explanatory. Not to mention, again, my attempts to add trope examples that I honestly didn\\\'t see as trying to be insulting or even joking at all, again I focus on BrokenBase here.
