[001]
ablackraptor
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It hasn't 'came down to' anything. Don't be so dramatic, its actually a little annoying.
Firstly, you cited a review that wasn't even in English. As has been said by myself and others, citing a review to 'back it up' ''isn't necessary'', and all it does is come off as you trying to make your point look more legitimate. If you actually do translate the review, its not really ''that'' negative in its points either (at least not as negative as the post above makes it sound); it does make fun of the smaller scale by comparing it to a barfight, but the point about changing the incident isn't really criticised as being 'less legit' so much as states 'oh yeah, and they change this too'.
Honestly, this whole mess wouldn't have happened if you didn't try to cite the source; if you just posted it as if it was a fan reaction then it likely would have been edited to be more neutral rather than dropped entirely.
Firstly, you cited a review that wasn't even in English. As has been said by myself and others, citing a review to 'back it up' ''isn't necessary'', and all it does is come off as you trying to make your point look more legitimate. If you actually do translate the review, its not really ''that'' negative in its points either (at least not as negative as the post above makes it sound); it does make fun of the smaller scale by comparing it to a barfight, but the point about changing the incident isn't really criticised as being 'less legit' so much as states 'oh yeah, and they change this too'.
Honestly, this whole mess wouldn't have happened if you didn't try to cite the source; if you just posted it as if it was a fan reaction then it likely would have been edited to be more neutral rather than dropped entirely.
to:
GrigorII
It hasn\'t \'came down to\' anything. Don\'t be so dramatic, its actually a little annoying.
It hasn\'t \'came down to\' anything. Don\'t be so dramatic, its actually a little annoying.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
Secondly, my 'claim' isn't exactly a point anyone could physically provide evidence for; how exactly would one 'prove' that they've never seen something? That's like trying to ask an Atheist to prove they've never seen God, or asking a witness to prove they didn't see a crime they claim to not have seen. Its just illogical.
to:
Firstly, you cited a review that wasn\'t even in English. As has been said by myself and others, citing a review to \'back it up\' \'\'isn\'t necessary\'\', and all it does is come off as you trying to make your point look more legitimate. If you actually do translate the review, its not really \'\'that\'\' negative in its points either (at least not as negative as the post above makes it sound); it does make fun of the smaller scale by comparing it to a barfight, but the point about changing the incident isn\'t really criticised as being \'less legit\' so much as states \'oh yeah, and they change this too\'.
Honestly, this whole mess wouldn\'t have happened if you didn\'t try to cite the source; if you just posted it as if it was a fan reaction then it likely would have been edited to be more neutral rather than dropped entirely.
Honestly, this whole mess wouldn\'t have happened if you didn\'t try to cite the source; if you just posted it as if it was a fan reaction then it likely would have been edited to be more neutral rather than dropped entirely.
