Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 9581356" data-attributes="member: 20564">I look forward to your supported reasoning why.It seems this we agree on.Sorry, your &quot;No. Just no.&quot; does not provide any support trying to dispel my statements about Day 1 errata being indicative of a rushed project.&nbsp; And since you also agree that it's a rushed project, it doesn't even need that support.&nbsp; Without any more than an attempt to handwave it away I'll consider that MM 2025 was rushed to be an standing point.&quot;What are you even talking about?&quot; - as explained, the error rate between a project rushed out the door and an one that wasn't.Ah, you admit that you don't understand what is being talked about and then &quot;sheesh&quot; it.&nbsp; What an emotional response.If you feel need to respond, please do so with substantive support for why a rushed project won't have more errors than one that wasn't rushed, my point, instead of just trying to handwave it away or make an emotional argument.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 9581356, member: 20564"] I look forward to your supported reasoning why. It seems this we agree on. Sorry, your "No. Just no." does not provide any support trying to dispel my statements about Day 1 errata being indicative of a rushed project. And since you also agree that it's a rushed project, it doesn't even need that support. Without any more than an attempt to handwave it away I'll consider that MM 2025 was rushed to be an standing point. "What are you even talking about?" - as explained, the error rate between a project rushed out the door and an one that wasn't. Ah, you admit that you don't understand what is being talked about and then "sheesh" it. What an emotional response. If you feel need to respond, please do so with substantive support for why a rushed project won't have more errors than one that wasn't rushed, my point, instead of just trying to handwave it away or make an emotional argument. [/QUOTE]

Verification