moosemilkie

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by moosemilkie 10y ago

   It didn't even ask for permission the first time.
2. 2.▲
   by moosemilkie 10y ago

   What is "going wrong" in your scenario, though?
3. 3.▲
   by moosemilkie 11y ago

   And there go the goalposts.
4. 4.▲
   by moosemilkie 11y ago

   You manage to "revolutionise game journalism" yet?
5. 5.▲
   by moosemilkie 11y ago

   Why take the risk? They were probably deleted for a good reason.
6. 6.▲
   by moosemilkie 11y ago

   I merely wanted to let you know that your assumption that their example was hypothetical was wrong, since you filled it out with some fictitious details instead of the truth. Which you're still doing, in claiming that anybody shot a po
7. 7.▲
   by moosemilkie 11y ago

   If you're aware, then why lie, and say they didn't know what happened? Why make up a fairy tale about "violent, righteous riots" and an injured police officer? I can't tell you how it affects your point because I ap
8. 8.▲
   by moosemilkie 11y ago

   If you click the "source" link at the bottom of the piece, you'll find that this is not a hypothetical situation. That's an actual statement put out the police themselves, who know exactly what happened.