Seriously, going weeks without updates only to have several while I'm offline for a few hours is a pain.
I know that feeling, that's why I stopped posting suggestions other than vetoing some silly stuff from time to time. Anyway, we are in no condition to even try to request something from FFS
I can always hope, though.
This isn't even what I was talking about, but this is also hypocritical! Your reasoning is that it's ok to attack people for doing things you find annoying. (Attacking people is worse than this.) Claiming that someone is being annoying and then deciding to annoy them? Hypocritical, and fallacious to boot: two rights don't make a wrong.
How am I being annoying by pointing out that others are being annoying?
And my original point was this: you complain about the thread being filled with slog worship, but attacking of slog people is just as pervasive. This is also hypocritical.
The differences?
1. The attack on Slog worship, as you keep calling it, is nowhere near so mind-numbingly stupid.
2. Slog worship has on multiple occasions threatened to damage our ability to properly continue, by favoring Slog over rationality.
3. No, "attacking of slog people" is NOT anywhere NEAR as pervasive as the Slog-worship.
4. Guess what? If the Slog worship goes away (or at least dies down to a minor thing), the people "attacking" Slog will also stop. On the other hand, if the people "attacking" Slog stop, the Slog-worship will not disappear, and may actually increase in frequency!
Also, we
really need to work on your definition of "attack," since it seems to imply that even the truest of accusations count as "attacks" as equally as hateful libel.