Read all your paragraphs, wasn't even bored. The thoughtful reply was above and beyond, in the best way. I personally don't bend over backwards to credit, say, a meme, but I do when I readily know it's providence. I don't, however, accept accolades for work I haven't done. It's probably natural for people to compliment purkiss when he drops a kickass meme, because as I understand it, half the time he literally made the meme. I have never taken the time to actually create one myself even though I've had many ideas I thought were winners, and so I am extremely grateful to him and others like him for their part in the meme wars. To your point about quality control regarding sites like GAW, whose job it is to "advance the front in the Information War," I think you're absolutely right that we need to set an example by being a standard bearer of truth. If something isnt true, Then IT IS FALSE. I think purkiss maybe got a bit defense about something he probably felt was pedantry, and didn't enjoy being called out when it could be seen as correct in spirit, and hair splitting. I would call it no harm, no foul. You asked how, where, and why I choose to comment. I do, like you, often notice corrections to something in the post written in the comments. Then inevitably, lower in the comments, I see another person commenting who obviously didnt get the correction, and is still moving forward with the wrong data, meaning they believe something that isn't true. This is not good for an information war, to the extent that correlates with the size/scope/relevance of the error (which i agree with purkiss that in this case was minimal). For me, it just feels too wierd to go through a comment section, checking to make sure everyone got the correction. But if that's your steez, I don't think you're doing a bad/wrong thing. I had a great day. Burnt the shit out of my neck on Day one of a 5 day chimney demolition on a beachside condo. I hope your week is great. Nice meeting you.
Wrong wrong wrong