Thread:Demotivator/@comment-26484417-20170404105439/@comment-26484417-20170406164938

It's just two different programs, two different fields; first computing science, and now information science. I dabble in other fields as well, though not officially. =)

Word count? Er, the first one had almost 10,000 words + documented code, and this one is almost 25,000 words + documented code.

Actually, Arrogantt was not that big of a problem. The greatest problem thus far has been The25thKnight who created new account The26thNight to circumvent the block, and who required a very individualistic and lengthy approach.

If it's about providing references, then I'm all for it. However, I would like to approach requests to take down content with the same prejudice as authorities treat emergency calls (i.e., if we're asked to take something down, there better be no support for it, or the person gets punished). After all, looking up references can be enormous time and effort drain, and when information is challenged someone is ultimately forced to verify it. Since this isn't exactly a block-worthy behaviour, I think that each person should get one or two chances before they are marked with "do not take seriously".

I don't know about that; do you at least offer cookies? I'm very fond of my individuality and my brand of grey-area, so any organisation--no matter how delicious their cookies--is unlikely to entice me. =P - Alrighty, so the user Slayer me has apparently created a new account to circumvent the block, but so far hasn't acted up beyond some comments to make it clear that it's him. Should we block the new account as well for circumventing the block?