Difference between revisions of "Talk:Age Restriction"

From Mario Fan Games Galaxy Wiki
(Citing information)
Line 23: Line 23:
  
 
-Grant
 
-Grant
 +
 +
Putting it back in with a technical rewording that better fits Joey's post.
 +
 +
Oh, and MFGG is anything but mature ;)
 +
 +
-[[User:Draco Icebane|Draco Icebane]] 17:40, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 21:40, 20 September 2007

Citing information

In relation to the following edit: http://mfgg.taloncrossing.com/wiki/index.php?title=Age_Restriction&oldid=12068 "Responding to a topic where many expressed concern that many active members would be banned as a result, Joey advised the members to edit their birthdates out of their profiles stating that moderators would be unable to ban them if they did not know their age."

Sources: http://mfgg.taloncrossing.com/index.php?showtopic=186382&view=findpost&p=2497650 http://mfgg.taloncrossing.com/index.php?showtopic=186382&view=findpost&p=2497970

-SonicProject 06:45, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

added reference in the article

-Draco Icebane 16:18, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

This is not factual, because he never advised anyone to edit out their birthdays - all he said was that people couldn't get in trouble for being underage without their age being known (which is practically true by definition), which does not of necessity imply that he wanted people to hide anything that they'd been open about before.

You may think that's what he implied, but judging from his message along with his edit, it really wasn't. I expect what he was meaning to say was merely that if people never put their birthdays IN THE FIRST PLACE and act like they're older, they wouldn't get in trouble concerning age because they couldn't possibly, and not that people should be dishonest and cover up what was previously there.

Also, it may be that the way he expressed it does appear to make it be such advice as you describe, but that doesn't mean he meant it that way. His posts were not a rephrased version of "edit out your birthdates so you won't get caught", so he wasn't literally saying it. If anything, it would have been an implication, and one can't judge what he intended to imply, so one can't say that was what he was "really saying".

At any rate, the controversial bit of the article isn't necessary to the article regardless, and removal of it won't falsify the article at all, so I'm removing it again; and attempts to keep trying to put it back in just because of some sort of "power struggle" would not be very mature.

-Grant

Putting it back in with a technical rewording that better fits Joey's post.

Oh, and MFGG is anything but mature ;)

-Draco Icebane 17:40, 20 September 2007 (EDT)