I wasn't being hostile towards you… I was being hostile to whoever made those errors… if it wasn't you, don't take it personally.
Here's the cleanup posts in question:
Yeah, whoever that Baker is, they need a little more discernment in how they classify notable posts.
When I see most breads having maybe 5-8 "notable" posts, then suddenly a new baker comes in and 2 breads have like 20… and half of them are raisins… (you know, the fake chocolate chips that fool you into thinking a cookie is delicious, but it's really just healthy for you and tastes like ass)… you gotta wonder what the heck is going on there.
LOL, I know… but Penny from Big Bang Theory got married! That's totes notable!
LOOK EVERYONE, A KEYBOARD WARRIOR! Better respect him or he'll type HARDER at you!
I truly meant no disrespect to you or whoever was Baking at the time of my "complaints"… I suspect the errant baker simply needs to be trained a bit better to have some more discernment.
As for me, I would LOVE to bake, but I can't commit that much time to it… as in, I can't be sure I'll be able to stick with any baking for the duration until a handoff happens… My life is like a kid with ADHD… I could be pulled away at any moment.
Learn to read, faggot.
I said I don't have time to be a BAKER… as in… if I accept a handoff, from that time until I hand off to another person… I don't have THAT MUCH TIME in one continuous streak… or at least, I can't be SURE I'll have that time.
I have time to LEARN TO BAKE… that's fucking retarded to think I said anything CLOSE to that…
So STFU and KYS.
If that was the point of the post, it should have been made in the post.
"Hey, Q said follow the wives, and this dude who is someone we're keeping an eye on, just married this famous chick."
The post was about Kelly, not about the schmuck he married… the headline was "Good News: blah blah blah"… not "Follow the wives… blah blah blah."
You want your post considered to be "notable"? MAKE IT FUCKING NOTABLE IN THE POST… don't leave it for people to guess at or figure out on their own. It's not notable if there's no actual DIGGING present within it.
http://criticalthinkingacademy.net/index.php/blog/entry/the-perfectionist-fallacy
THE PERFECTIONIST FALLACY
This is a variation of the False Dilemma Fallacy, also called the Continuum Fallacy. It goes something like this:
If Policy X does not meet all the objectives as well as we want it to (ie perfectly), then Policy X should be rejected.
This principle downgrades X simply because it isn't perfect. It says in effect " Either the policy is perfect. else we must reject it"
As you can see… not only is it true… but the entire thread did not even consist of anyone claiming it was "notable" at all…
And it wasn't anything to do with "Watch the wives"… it was "congrats!"
No digging… not fucking remotely notable…
Stop defending crap bakes, y'all!
HOLY FUCKING SHIT!
MAD RESPECT, ANON!
Thank you for stepping up like a man!
Please accept my own apology for being a bit of a dick about it…
But I will never apologize for being a Quality Control on the bread! :)