Thread:Looperreallyreallysucks/@comment-24439896-20190405215053/@comment-34055410-20190406051529

@Red Chevalier ...I still do have proof that many of these categories belong. At this point, I’m simply too tired to individually argue for the inclusion of each categories, as it takes a lot of time for me to type all of it, and it also uses up energy. I was ONLY saying that there’s also ANOTHER reason to keep the categories on the page in case you try to remove all the categories again, as we haven’t officially decided whether the categories stay or not, so removing the categories again would only cause trouble. And the reason shouldn’t even come off as unreasonable: we have no proof that they DON’T belong. My last reply, if anything, was more of a concluding statement that was made in case you remove all the categories from the article again and end up causing an edit-war. So basically, it was a temporary solution. If I stumble across a page that I’m basically not familiar with, and I feel like removing a category, I would need proof that the category doesn’t belong. Otherwise, I’m just “rustling jimmies”.

BTW, just wondering, what exactly does “gross inversion” mean?


 * sigh* Guys, I don’t wanna seem aggressive or abrasive, but I’ll say this: We. CANNOT. Edit-war.