Difference between revisions of "Ghyll talk:Heh-blammo balance"
PhineasCrank (talk | contribs) m (Gettin' bombed?) |
|||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
Well, I gather from the remarks that 1) my changes to remove the "official" nature of my statements and 2) my statement about Ball Lightning Liquor are both unacceptable. However, in both cases, I'm not sure why. Please elaborate. Thanks. --[[User:DrBacchus|DrBacchus]] 20:51, 4 Nov 2004 (EST) | Well, I gather from the remarks that 1) my changes to remove the "official" nature of my statements and 2) my statement about Ball Lightning Liquor are both unacceptable. However, in both cases, I'm not sure why. Please elaborate. Thanks. --[[User:DrBacchus|DrBacchus]] 20:51, 4 Nov 2004 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I don't see anything wrong with the references to Ball Lighning Liqueur, myself. Just because it's an explosive doesn't mean it can't be a tasty drink, too! -- [[User:PhineasCrank|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 07:33, 5 Nov 2004 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 08:33, 5 November 2004
Two points here seriously violate the quod scripsit, scripsit rules of Ghyll: the second sentence "Or so they say', since the Brotherhood "says" nothing of the kind, and the notion of an "official story" for the same reason. These need to be changed. --Jcowan 23:55, 30 Oct 2004 (EDT)
Point taken. I'll fix promptly. --DrBacchus 07:17, 31 Oct 2004 (EST)
Well, please do, DrB! --Jcowan 20:56, 3 Nov 2004 (EST)
15:54 < kpreid> sbp: I haven't been following Ghyll, but the reference to 'Ball
Lightning Liqueur' from that page doesn't make much sense to me.
15:54 < sbp> er, Expos?? rather
15:55 < sbp> kpreid: http://gamegrene.com/wiki/Ball_Lightning_Liqueur
15:55 < kpreid> sbp: or are blatant weirdnesses allowed as long as they're not
citations?
15:55 < kpreid> sbp: i mean it doesn't make sense given the content of the
latter page.
15:55 < kpreid> (to me)
15:57 < sbp> hmm, I see what you mean. I think there are several ways to
explain the nonsensical use away, but it's more likely that
DrBacchus just misunderstood what BLL is
15:57 < sbp> I'll copy this to the Talk page
15:57 < sbp> loggy: pointer?
15:57 <+loggy> See http://swhack.com/logs/2004-11-04#T00-57-46
--Sean B. Palmer 20:00, 3 Nov 2004 (EST)
Actually, there are several references to BLL being consumed as a rather risky beverage. Just because it blows up doesn't mean it's not tasty and will make you blind. Grain alcohol will do that, too. --Doctor Phineas Crank 20:08, 3 Nov 2004 (EST)
It's wood alcohol (methanol) that makes you blind, FWIW. --Jcowan 20:56, 3 Nov 2004 (EST)
If you drink enough grain alcohol, it'll blind you, too. [[1]] --Doctor Phineas Crank 18:00, 4 Nov 2004 (EST)
Well, I gather from the remarks that 1) my changes to remove the "official" nature of my statements and 2) my statement about Ball Lightning Liquor are both unacceptable. However, in both cases, I'm not sure why. Please elaborate. Thanks. --DrBacchus 20:51, 4 Nov 2004 (EST)
I don't see anything wrong with the references to Ball Lighning Liqueur, myself. Just because it's an explosive doesn't mean it can't be a tasty drink, too! -- Doctor Phineas Crank 07:33, 5 Nov 2004 (EST)
