[002]
TripleElation
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
You\'re right that we should keep the example (note that I supported this position in the discussion above, even before this was YMMV). But even YMMV has standards, and we should be [[RightingGreatWrongs trying to characterize the mileage varying, not pass rulings on who\'s right and who\'s wrong]]. You can\'t just state things you \'\'know\'\' aren\'t universally agreed upon and expect the example to remain intact.
to:
You\\\'re right that we should keep the example (note that I supported this position in the discussion above, even before this was YMMV). Maybe I was too quick to delete it, and I apologize; I failed to notice that since the discussion where we defaulted to removing it, this has become a YMMV trope, which means a lot more flexibility on what stays.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
The tone, for one, was definitely not neutral. It starts \
to:
But even YMMV has standards, and we should be [[RightingGreatWrongs trying to characterize the mileage varying, not pass rulings on who\\\'s right and who\\\'s wrong]]. You can\\\'t just state things you \\\'\\\'know\\\'\\\' aren\\\'t universally agreed upon and expect the example to remain intact.
The tone, for one, was definitely not neutral. It starts \\\"\\\'\\\'Some\\\'\\\' of the hate against them as a couple...\\\", which is obviously trying to convey the impression that there\\\'s some huge critical mass of such hate in the fandom (polls say: not even remotely). Then it proceeds to pile on some \\\'\\\'very\\\'\\\' controversial accusations (no meaningful interaction since book 2? Even now, after all these years, I can hear the ghost of the fandom\\\'s collective consciousness writhe in response, \\\"CHOOOCOLATEEE IN THE LIBRAAARRRYYYY!\\\"). In short, it wasn\\\'t being fair. I rewrote it in an effort to make it fair\\\'\\\'er\\\'\\\'. I imagine there\\\'s a lot of work still to be done on that front.
Also, @Fallen Legend: You do \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' get to remove YMMV examples wholesale without discussion. Quoting some part of the fandom which thinks it\\\'s not an example does not equal \\\"the example admitting it is not an example\\\". I restored what you removed, and if you want to discuss the removal of these examples properly- go ahead. But I do not recommend unilaterally removing them again.
The tone, for one, was definitely not neutral. It starts \\\"\\\'\\\'Some\\\'\\\' of the hate against them as a couple...\\\", which is obviously trying to convey the impression that there\\\'s some huge critical mass of such hate in the fandom (polls say: not even remotely). Then it proceeds to pile on some \\\'\\\'very\\\'\\\' controversial accusations (no meaningful interaction since book 2? Even now, after all these years, I can hear the ghost of the fandom\\\'s collective consciousness writhe in response, \\\"CHOOOCOLATEEE IN THE LIBRAAARRRYYYY!\\\"). In short, it wasn\\\'t being fair. I rewrote it in an effort to make it fair\\\'\\\'er\\\'\\\'. I imagine there\\\'s a lot of work still to be done on that front.
Also, @Fallen Legend: You do \\\'\\\'not\\\'\\\' get to remove YMMV examples wholesale without discussion. Quoting some part of the fandom which thinks it\\\'s not an example does not equal \\\"the example admitting it is not an example\\\". I restored what you removed, and if you want to discuss the removal of these examples properly- go ahead. But I do not recommend unilaterally removing them again.
