In post 1213, Flameaxe wrote:In post 1207, UberNinja wrote:Om isn't trying to force it down our throats. There are a lot of people that like it.
These two statements are 100% exclusive, and I respectfully disagree with you and Flay on the matter. Being first or last in a title discussion doesn't make a difference. At least 90% of his posts (random number!) on the last few pages feel like they come from a campaigning standpoint and thats it. Overstating, sure. Complete exaggeration? Hardly.
(on an unrelated note: I don't think there is an official rule for having names in titles. See UA's title.)
Ummm... it might have something to do with the fact that there were precisely 3 titles discussed over those pages. And one was only discussed as saying what happened to this title. So... what else were you expecting? Do people have to stay out of any discussion propsing a title for them?
Of course, his posts after this post of yours do somewhat dull my point. It seems Om needs to learn how to give up an argument, rather than repeatedly defending that his spam assassinations were useful whenever anybody even hinted at disagreement.