![]() |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: At what age did you become/declare yourself a theist? | |||
| 0-10 |
|
3 | 27.27% |
| 11-15 |
|
2 | 18.18% |
| 16-20 |
|
1 | 9.09% |
| 21-25 |
|
2 | 18.18% |
| 26-30 |
|
1 | 9.09% |
| 31-35 |
|
2 | 18.18% |
| 35+ |
|
0 | 0% |
| Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If you're trying to fix it while they're attacking you're just wasting ink. Wait until they're done then fix it. [/ QUOTE ] This is logically incorrect. [/ QUOTE ] How?? If you're trying to fix something while they are in the process of messing it up they just mess it up again. You end up wasting ink fixing the same thing 2-3 times. Been there, done that. [/ QUOTE ] Apologies, I didn't mean to imply one way is better than the other, just that they both use roughly the same amount of ink. It's like, villain uses 5% ink vandalizing and hero uses 5% fixing. Then villain uses %5 again re-vandalizing the same spot and hero uses another 5% fixing. If hero didn't fix, then villain wouldn't use 5% re-vandalizing and would vandalize another different spot. In the end roughly 10% would be used by both sides. It's just a matter of preference I guess, and how overwhelming the attack is. [/ QUOTE ] This is based upon the presumption that it takes an equal amount of ink to fix vandalism that is does to create it. I think this is false, as whenever you are cleaning up scribble you inevitballe use up more ink as it is impossible to only draw over the scribble. |
|
|