[004]
TrevMUN
Current Version
Changed line(s) 14 from:
n
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \
to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. Stop trying to add it in.=]
Half a year or so after that comment was made, [=AmuroNT1=] edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
-->4th Apr \\\'11 11:45:57 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. \\\'\\\'And for that matter, AB cops to the misinformation himself in the Good Eats books.\\\'\\\' Stop trying to add it in.=]
Then, even though the original markup comment requested people to \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' file this under CriticalResearchFailure, DidNotDoTheResearch, or DanBrowned, [=AmuroNT1=] proceeds add a modified version of his original example on the YMMV tab, this time as a CriticalResearchFailure:
-->7th Sep \\\'11 4:38:22 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Added line(s) 1 (click to see context) :
-->* CriticalResearchFailure: Several episodes perpetuate the myth that the sandwich was invented so Jon Montagu, the Earl of Sandwich, could eat and play cards at the same time. In his books, Alton admits that history remembers Montagu as a sober and studious man, meaning he probably didn\\\'t gamble and the old story is most likely fake (AB does suggest that maybe the sandwich was made so he could \\\'\\\'work\\\'\\\' and eat at the same time, but says we\\\'ll never know for sure).
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn\\\'t trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what\\\'s said on the subject:
-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order \\\"the same as Sandwich!\\\" However, the exact circumstances of the invention are still the subject of debate. A rumour in a contemporary travel book called Tour to London (although not confirmed) by Pierre Jean Grosley formed the popular myth that bread and meat sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling table. The sober alternative is provided by Sandwich\\\'s biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich\\\'s commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk.\\\"\\\'\\\'
Wikipedia cites these two links:\\\\\\\\
[[http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm]]\\\\\\\\
[[http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html]]
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
CriticalResearchFailure\\\'s own main page says that the trope is for remarks \\\"so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up.\\\" However, the \\\"research\\\" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, [=AmuroNT1=] is overstepping his bounds. I\\\'ve removed the markup comment on the main page (since [=AmuroNT1=] obviously saw it and didn\\\'t care), as well as his example here on the YMMV page.
Half a year or so after that comment was made, [=AmuroNT1=] edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
-->4th Apr \\\'11 11:45:57 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. \\\'\\\'And for that matter, AB cops to the misinformation himself in the Good Eats books.\\\'\\\' Stop trying to add it in.=]
Then, even though the original markup comment requested people to \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' file this under CriticalResearchFailure, DidNotDoTheResearch, or DanBrowned, [=AmuroNT1=] proceeds add a modified version of his original example on the YMMV tab, this time as a CriticalResearchFailure:
-->7th Sep \\\'11 4:38:22 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Added line(s) 1 (click to see context) :
-->* CriticalResearchFailure: Several episodes perpetuate the myth that the sandwich was invented so Jon Montagu, the Earl of Sandwich, could eat and play cards at the same time. In his books, Alton admits that history remembers Montagu as a sober and studious man, meaning he probably didn\\\'t gamble and the old story is most likely fake (AB does suggest that maybe the sandwich was made so he could \\\'\\\'work\\\'\\\' and eat at the same time, but says we\\\'ll never know for sure).
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn\\\'t trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what\\\'s said on the subject:
-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order \\\"the same as Sandwich!\\\" However, the exact circumstances of the invention are still the subject of debate. A rumour in a contemporary travel book called Tour to London (although not confirmed) by Pierre Jean Grosley formed the popular myth that bread and meat sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling table. The sober alternative is provided by Sandwich\\\'s biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich\\\'s commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk.\\\"\\\'\\\'
Wikipedia cites these two links:\\\\\\\\
[[http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm]]\\\\\\\\
[[http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html]]
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
CriticalResearchFailure\\\'s own main page says that the trope is for remarks \\\"so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up.\\\" However, the \\\"research\\\" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, [=AmuroNT1=] is overstepping his bounds. I\\\'ve removed the markup comment on the main page (since [=AmuroNT1=] obviously saw it and didn\\\'t care), as well as his example here on the YMMV page.
Changed line(s) 14 from:
n
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \
to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. Stop trying to add it in.=]
Half a year or so after that comment was made, [=AmuroNT1=] edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
-->4th Apr \\\'11 11:45:57 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. \\\'\\\'And for that matter, AB cops to the misinformation himself in the Good Eats books.\\\'\\\' Stop trying to add it in.=]
Then, even though the original markup comment requested people to \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' file this under CriticalResearchFailure, DidNotDoTheResearch, or DanBrowned, [=AmuroNT1=] proceeds add a modified version of his original example on the YMMV tab, this time as a CriticalResearchFailure:
-->7th Sep \\\'11 4:38:22 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Added line(s) 1 (click to see context) :
-->* CriticalResearchFailure: Several episodes perpetuate the myth that the sandwich was invented so Jon Montagu, the Earl of Sandwich, could eat and play cards at the same time. In his books, Alton admits that history remembers Montagu as a sober and studious man, meaning he probably didn\\\'t gamble and the old story is most likely fake (AB does suggest that maybe the sandwich was made so he could \\\'\\\'work\\\'\\\' and eat at the same time, but says we\\\'ll never know for sure).
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn\\\'t trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what\\\'s said on the subject:
-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order \\\"the same as Sandwich!\\\" However, the exact circumstances of the invention are still the subject of debate. A rumour in a contemporary travel book called Tour to London (although not confirmed) by Pierre Jean Grosley formed the popular myth that bread and meat sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling table. The sober alternative is provided by Sandwich\\\'s biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich\\\'s commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk.\\\"\\\'\\\'
Wikipedia cites these two links:
[[http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm]]
[[http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html]]
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
CriticalResearchFailure\\\'s own main page says that the trope is for remarks \\\"so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up.\\\" However, the \\\"research\\\" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, [=AmuroNT1=] is overstepping his bounds.
Half a year or so after that comment was made, [=AmuroNT1=] edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
-->4th Apr \\\'11 11:45:57 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. \\\'\\\'And for that matter, AB cops to the misinformation himself in the Good Eats books.\\\'\\\' Stop trying to add it in.=]
Then, even though the original markup comment requested people to \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' file this under CriticalResearchFailure, DidNotDoTheResearch, or DanBrowned, [=AmuroNT1=] proceeds add a modified version of his original example on the YMMV tab, this time as a CriticalResearchFailure:
-->7th Sep \\\'11 4:38:22 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Added line(s) 1 (click to see context) :
-->* CriticalResearchFailure: Several episodes perpetuate the myth that the sandwich was invented so Jon Montagu, the Earl of Sandwich, could eat and play cards at the same time. In his books, Alton admits that history remembers Montagu as a sober and studious man, meaning he probably didn\\\'t gamble and the old story is most likely fake (AB does suggest that maybe the sandwich was made so he could \\\'\\\'work\\\'\\\' and eat at the same time, but says we\\\'ll never know for sure).
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn\\\'t trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what\\\'s said on the subject:
-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order \\\"the same as Sandwich!\\\" However, the exact circumstances of the invention are still the subject of debate. A rumour in a contemporary travel book called Tour to London (although not confirmed) by Pierre Jean Grosley formed the popular myth that bread and meat sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling table. The sober alternative is provided by Sandwich\\\'s biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich\\\'s commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk.\\\"\\\'\\\'
Wikipedia cites these two links:
[[http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm]]
[[http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html]]
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
CriticalResearchFailure\\\'s own main page says that the trope is for remarks \\\"so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up.\\\" However, the \\\"research\\\" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, [=AmuroNT1=] is overstepping his bounds.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I\'ve been looking at the edit history for this series and I\'ve noticed that @/AmuroNT1 has been rather determined to try and slam Alton Brown over the Earl of Sandwich, using increasingly negative means to do so.
to:
I\\\'ve been looking at the edit history for this series and I\\\'ve noticed that @/AmuroNT1 has been rather determined to try and berate Alton Brown over the Earl of Sandwich, using increasingly negative means to do so.
Changed line(s) 14 from:
n
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \
to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. Stop trying to add it in.=]
Half a year or so after that comment was made, [=AmuroNT1=] edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
-->4th Apr \\\'11 11:45:57 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. \\\'\\\'And for that matter, AB cops to the misinformation himself in the Good Eats books.\\\'\\\' Stop trying to add it in.=]
Then, even though the original markup comment requested people to \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' file this under CriticalResearchFailure, DidNotDoTheResearch, or DanBrowned, [=AmuroNT1=] proceeds to add his original example, modified, on the YMMV tab, this time as a CriticalResearchFailure:
-->7th Sep \\\'11 4:38:22 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Added line(s) 1 (click to see context) :
-->* CriticalResearchFailure: Several episodes perpetuate the myth that the sandwich was invented so Jon Montagu, the Earl of Sandwich, could eat and play cards at the same time. In his books, Alton admits that history remembers Montagu as a sober and studious man, meaning he probably didn\\\'t gamble and the old story is most likely fake (AB does suggest that maybe the sandwich was made so he could \\\'\\\'work\\\'\\\' and eat at the same time, but says we\\\'ll never know for sure).
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn\\\'t trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what\\\'s said on the subject:
-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order \\\"the same as Sandwich!\\\" However, the exact circumstances of the invention are still the subject of debate. A rumour in a contemporary travel book called Tour to London (although not confirmed) by Pierre Jean Grosley formed the popular myth that bread and meat sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling table. The sober alternative is provided by Sandwich\\\'s biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich\\\'s commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk.\\\"\\\'\\\'
Wikipedia cites these two links:
[[http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm]]
[[http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html]]
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
CriticalResearchFailure\\\'s own main page says that the trope is for remarks \\\"so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up.\\\" However, the \\\"research\\\" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, [=AmuroNT1=] is overstepping his bounds.
Half a year or so after that comment was made, [=AmuroNT1=] edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
-->4th Apr \\\'11 11:45:57 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) to:
-->[=%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown \\\"perpetuating a myth\\\" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. \\\'\\\'And for that matter, AB cops to the misinformation himself in the Good Eats books.\\\'\\\' Stop trying to add it in.=]
Then, even though the original markup comment requested people to \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' file this under CriticalResearchFailure, DidNotDoTheResearch, or DanBrowned, [=AmuroNT1=] proceeds to add his original example, modified, on the YMMV tab, this time as a CriticalResearchFailure:
-->7th Sep \\\'11 4:38:22 PM \\\'\\\'\\\'[=AmuroNT1=]\\\'\\\'\\\'
-->Added line(s) 1 (click to see context) :
-->* CriticalResearchFailure: Several episodes perpetuate the myth that the sandwich was invented so Jon Montagu, the Earl of Sandwich, could eat and play cards at the same time. In his books, Alton admits that history remembers Montagu as a sober and studious man, meaning he probably didn\\\'t gamble and the old story is most likely fake (AB does suggest that maybe the sandwich was made so he could \\\'\\\'work\\\'\\\' and eat at the same time, but says we\\\'ll never know for sure).
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn\\\'t trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what\\\'s said on the subject:
-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order \\\"the same as Sandwich!\\\" However, the exact circumstances of the invention are still the subject of debate. A rumour in a contemporary travel book called Tour to London (although not confirmed) by Pierre Jean Grosley formed the popular myth that bread and meat sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling table. The sober alternative is provided by Sandwich\\\'s biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich\\\'s commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk.\\\"\\\'\\\'
Wikipedia cites these two links:
[[http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm]]
[[http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html]]
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
CriticalResearchFailure\\\'s own main page says that the trope is for remarks \\\"so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up.\\\" However, the \\\"research\\\" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really \\\'\\\'is\\\'\\\' up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, [=AmuroNT1=] is overstepping his bounds.
