User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45314928-20200606025128/@comment-45314928-20200606042404

i dont care if you dont use the teminology i use, but what i dont appreciate is you repeatedly telling me that i have "misunderstood" or "misinterpreted" someone - due to your personal difference of opinion.

the extract was from an unproduced story, as stated by Harness himself. Emily Cook was asked about the unproduced story - what would she think the fan is asking her about? the 2015 unproduced television story or the extract from an unproduced novelisation story that was shared after the tweet-along? also, it makes no sense - if this "short story" was part of lockdown - for her not to acknowledged that in her answer. it is very clear what she meant.

and your only evidence for this being licensed is that you believe that during the tweet-along hour all tweets from the guest representatives are somehow licensed. yet, you then move the goalposts when it is pointed out to you that Harness' tweet-along had ended way before he posted the extract. when, in your opinion, does a guest representative's tweets stop being licensed? a day after the tweet-along? a week? a month? so Harness could still be waffling out "licensed" stories now?