nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
13,818
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 30:
Line 30: + + + +
→Mercilessly Attacked
:::At the same time, while I don't wish to get into a flame war, the comment about forcing through changes is inappropriate given the context of the changes. Your explanations for calling the attacks merciless give/gave no justification for its inclusion. Had you provided a citation for it, this give-and-take would be unnecessary. Ultimately, the article works better without the word. --[[User:Ursus|Ursus]] 16:16, 30 August 2007 (EDT)
:::At the same time, while I don't wish to get into a flame war, the comment about forcing through changes is inappropriate given the context of the changes. Your explanations for calling the attacks merciless give/gave no justification for its inclusion. Had you provided a citation for it, this give-and-take would be unnecessary. Ultimately, the article works better without the word. --[[User:Ursus|Ursus]] 16:16, 30 August 2007 (EDT)
::::We agree mercilessly was better than no choice at all. I accept repeatedly because I can see where you're coming from, but I also believe that mercilessly was appropriate in this situation. How many times was Quayle asked the same question in the Vice Presidential debate? Has that ever happened with anyone else in the history of the debates? How about the widely reported allegations made by a bimbo that took up with married men that Quayle made a pass at her and she turned him down?
::::Forcing through is wrong no matter what rationale you try to give it, and will ultimately result in your being blocked if that is a pattern. There should not be a need to mention it again. Please realize that any attempts to rationalize may carry personal meaning to you, but has no value to this site. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:12, 2 September 2007 (EDT)