User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45314928-20200606025128/@comment-45692830-20200606043409

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45314928-20200606025128/@comment-45692830-20200606043409 It's not a difference of opinion. Your reading is literally untenable. It requires you to both think the user asking thinks excerpts of stories are equivalent to entire stories and that Cook thinks that "mentioning" is equivalent to "posting" or "releasing". Again, I find it bizarre that you insist we take Harness's words literally, without any analysis of context, yet do not do the same for Cook's. (When proper analysis of both supports my reading, but a literal reading of Cook's words supports mine as well.)

Again. To say that Harness said "oh it's from an unproduced story" and ignore the context in which he said is wholly unreasonable. I've addressed above why people think him saying that is a framing device. So you can't keep insisting that Harness saying that is some trump card. It's not. You actually have to address the arguments made at some point.

Similarly, we can assume that Cook answered the question she was asked and then answered coherently, with the word "mentioned", or answered a question she wasn't asked, and used the word "mentioned", which doesn't actually answer the question she wasn't asked. I think the first is far more likely.

And, of course, I do not believe I ever said that during the tweet along hour all tweets from the guest representatives are licensed. In fact, let me be clear, I wholly disavow that notion. Instead I pointed out that this is a Doctor Who story associated with Lockdown! and such stories are coordinated with Chibnall.

So please, tell me where I moved the goal posts?