HRWiki:STUFF/Archive/looking old

[edit] Evident STUFF

From: looking old
Posted on: 22:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Arguments for:

1. If there ever comes another 2007 email not to mention it we can just remove it, but I find it notable for now.
2. We already note that the Lappy has not DELETED any emails even though it's not dead yet. Any arguments to oppose that?

Arguments against:

1. Coincidence. Looking old was the first one of 2007, and the joke started directly after.
2. Unnecessary fact.
3. It's all based on the calendar. What if 2007 started a month earlier, would we be noting all the stuff that was actually released in December?
4. "Currently" facts are rarely worthwhile.
5. The proposed fact is only notable with the assumption that TBC intended the DNA Evidence string to be a gag tied to 2007. It seems foolish to me that TBC would plan it that way yet 'forget' to include it in the email in question.

Additional comments:

• Re: arg for 1: If it winds up being the only email in 2007 to not mention DNA Evidence, then we note it. Not now.
  • No, we don't. See arg against #1.
    • We could note it then, as it would be interesting and notable (see the "DELETED!!" fact in huttah!), but it won't be noteworthy until December rolls around if it's still true.
      • • I agree. Right now, as it stands, it is nothing more than a coincidence. However, if all of the other emails between now and the end of the year have some mention of DNA evidence (and I doubt that they will, because this joke is starting to get a little old), then it really almost has to be noted, because of the length of the running gag.
          • Besides, it's not likely that the Brothers Chaps are actually going to follow through with this joke for the rest of the year. By the way HSR looked in rough copy, it looks like the joke will end for good soon.

[ Back to STUFF index ]