Talk:Loops/Do-while: Difference between revisions

:::Good formulations, consistent with Rosetta's goals, would protect innocent editors such as yourself from the honest feeling that this kind of inadvertent vandalism was somehow "correct" in spite of its deliberate destruction of content that filled a gap, provided insight, and was useful to learners. It would also protect contributors from having their time wasted by (ultimately abortive) interventions of this kind, and would protect readers from losing access to material that is useful on all 3 of Rosetta's axes of value.

:::As for your various implications that the validity of an argument is a function of its authorship: "original members", "criticism not for free" etc etc... Well ... probably more constructive to think about the issues :-) The specious character of the ''ad hominem'' fallacy has been only too well understood for thousands of years :-) [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 22:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)