(March 31, 2016 at 5:39 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:(March 31, 2016 at 4:43 pm)robvalue Wrote: Sure, probably not. I was just explaining how Huggy's signature wasn't randomly taken away as a staff conspiracy as he'd love to think.
Except your explanation is simply not true. I've provided the evidence that FaF was not misrepresented or taken out of context, I asked him a question and he answered the question, that IS the full context. Backtracking after the fact does not change the original context.
How is this not clear?
Posting the answer alone would take the answer out of context, But including the question with the answer puts the answer in proper context, got it?
The staff disagrees with your assessment - as I recall, the consensus was that the manner you chose to quote him implied something other than what he meant.
However, I'm not going to waste time digging up the details amongst all the reports on file to refresh my memory.
If you had a problem with the decision, you should have brought it up when it happened. If you did, and we declined to overturn it, well, that's just too fucking bad.
We consider it a closed issue. Time to move on.
