Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-45314928-20200606025128/@comment-45692830-20200606052749

I mean, the problem is that you can't account for the word choices used in that screenshot in your reading of the exchange. On the other hand, I can account for the fact that people are talking about a 2015 story in 2020. Cook is simply responding to the question someone asked her, and someone asked her what people were discussing at this wiki. If we look at Talk: How The Monk Got His Habit (short story), we see that you begin the discussion with conflating the short story with the discarded story. The question was made at 1:21 UTC May 17th.

So at this point we have you conflating the two, Scrooge point out you're wrong, you denying this and saying "what short story??? i dont see a short sotry", Scrooge saying "And even if a novelisation was for some insane reason begun in 2015, Harness deciding to release this specific scene in 2020 could still count as a separate short story release", and you beginning your grand theory of Emily Cook as the sole arbiter of Lockdown!.

So very clearly at this point Scrooge has pointed out the distinction between the two in detail on the talk page. Since such a question would not have been asked without this discussion taking place, and Scrooge pointed out the distinction in literally the second comment, it seems obvious that the poster in question knew about the distinction and was doing this for your sake to clear up your confusion.

Now, since I can explain these issues, and you can't explain the word choices, aside from something on par with "they misspoke", that means my reading is by default superior as it has more explanatory power.