05:1905:19, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
You do not understand, I am not seeking a consensus, I am making one that I know will be palatable to the most people
04:5804:58, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
I can see, and that is why I want to remove "between individuals" because then all the opposing parties can be reconciled and we can move on, what's wrong with that?
04:4504:45, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
And you use the discussion page? Have you responded to the US centric section? I think not. Where am I supposed to discuss this?
04:4004:40, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
State why you disagree with me here or on my talk page, nobody posts in discussion page (US centric et al. sections are ignored)
16 April 2010
03:3503:35, 16 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
What's wrong with my middle way? Some of you advocate for unnecessary details and others advocate for too much scarcity
05:1905:19, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
You do not understand, I am not seeking a consensus, I am making one that I know will be palatable to the most people
04:5804:58, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
I can see, and that is why I want to remove "between individuals" because then all the opposing parties can be reconciled and we can move on, what's wrong with that?
04:4504:45, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
And you use the discussion page? Have you responded to the US centric section? I think not. Where am I supposed to discuss this?
04:4004:40, 17 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
State why you disagree with me here or on my talk page, nobody posts in discussion page (US centric et al. sections are ignored)
16 April 2010
03:3503:35, 16 April 2010diffhist−62
Marriage
What's wrong with my middle way? Some of you advocate for unnecessary details and others advocate for too much scarcity