1

Not trying to start a flame war, merely to understand.

You apporved @eldentyrell's edit, that I have reverted and he then re-did.

You didn't post anything about this, not as a comment and not on Meta (that I've seen anyway).

Why did you do it? (Really, not blaming, just asking) Could you/we try to be more informative in the future in similar cases? (flame/revert wars ... if they're edited by admin, at least explain it somewhere ... and better yet, wait for community consensus before "judging" in a flame war).

I explained elsewhere why I reverted his edit - I really wanted the original title.

  • 4
    Oh, for the record, all 3 Bitcoin.SE mods are "David" so you might want to be a hair more specific in the future ;) – David Perry Jan 16 '12 at 19:50
  • 1
    @DavidPerry - right, forgot about that particular piece of trivia :) – ripper234 Jan 16 '12 at 19:59
3

That would be my fault for not reading meta before responding to a flag. I edited out of concern for potential slander/libel issues. Now that I've done my research and it's been clarified that you were directly quoting a statement from an outside source (and even cited that source in the question body, how'd I miss that?) I've reverted to your original title, but added quotes to emphasize to any lawyers in the crowd that we were not the origin of the accusation.

In the interest of preserving sanity, I've made the "middle road" edit and locked the question to prevent further edits, rollbacks, etc. This should be a non-issue since you've already got an answer and some upvotes.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .