Talk:New Order: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:19, 7 October 2014

2014-10-06 Kadin Arbosa: The New Order have been claiming that E-Uni "vouches" for them, pointing to the section that says:

     there is some evidence that the New Order honors these "indulgences."

I have changed the language used to hopefully make it clearer that E-Uni is not actually vouching for the New Order, and simply reporting that there is some evidence for their indulgences being honored. Perhaps a simple "E-Uni does not vouch or in any way endorse the New Order" declaration would be better.

2014-10-07 Kadin Arbosa: I believe that the "not written from a neutral point of view" tag is not warranted. I am simply stating the facts. Unless E-Uni IS going to vouch for CODE, then the facts are: 1) we have had reports that CODE have honored their indulgences. 2) we have no evidence that it is universally honored. Given that my changes have been labeled as non-neutral, I will revert the changes I made, so as not to cause any issues.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
--10-06:
+-10-06 Kadin Arbosa:
 The New Order have been claiming that E-Uni "vouches" for them, pointing to the section that says:
        there is some evidence that the New Order honors these "indulgences."
 I have changed the language used to hopefully make it clearer that E-Uni is not actually vouching for the New Order, and simply reporting that there is '''''some''''' evidence for their indulgences being honored. Perhaps a simple "E-Uni does not vouch or in any way endorse the New Order" declaration would be better.
+-10-07 Kadin Arbosa:
+I believe that the "not written from a neutral point of view" tag is not warranted.
+I am simply stating the facts. Unless E-Uni IS going to vouch for CODE, then the facts are:
+) we have had reports that CODE have honored their indulgences.
+) we have no evidence that it is universally honored.
+Given that my changes have been labeled as non-neutral, I will revert the changes I made, so as not to cause any issues.