| Revision as of 15:57, 28 April 2013 editNE Ent (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors20,717 edits agreeing, somewhat← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:53, 30 April 2013 edit undoKonjakupoet (talk | contribs)208 edits Taking NE Ent's advice. Not sure where the claim that I was not factual came from, though. Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| I hope you take the information I provided to heart. You honestly had a good point originally - you've really messed it up. My hope is that you'll back away from this "battle" for a bit and re-group. (]<span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">]</span>]) 15:46, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :Not the best advice -- it's a run of the mill messup not a horrific one and it's ''not'' a battle in the first place so there's no need to "re-group." There's a need to refocus on contribution the encyclopedia and letting other editors deal with the conduct issues. <small>]</small> 15:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
| The best analogy I've come up with over the years is that Misplaced Pages conflicts are often like ] towards a cliff -- often the "winner" isn't the editor has the stronger point but rather the one who stops first (before going over the cliff). Stop now and resist the urge to reply to the other editors contributions; at this point any further back and forth will just muddy the waters and make consensus harder to determine. <small>]</small> 15:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC) | |||