Skip to Content
3-05-2012 @ 10:00AM
It wasn't intended to be trollish at all. I was simply trying to suggest that it could use more focus.Personally I found it difficult to read.
3-05-2012 @ 10:26AM
Perhaps my reading level is sub par then. I had no problems reading it whatsoever.
3-05-2012 @ 12:21PM
Your comment wasn't constructive. And your metaphor was bizarre (and unhelpful).What was disorganized about this post? We had subheads for leveling spells, a subhead for talents, and then Destro/Demo/Afflic in their own little chunks. The article accomplished what it set out to do -- quickly dish out the changes that the MoP talent calculator brings for Warlocks at the moment -- which is what Megan managed to do. Offering up actual suggestions and not blank statements that go nowhere is what's constructive. For instance:Instead of saying "Your article seems unfocused." You could have said, "I feel there is too much information here for such a brief article. Maybe next time, you could tackle the changes for each spec in separate articles, so there is more depth and clarity."
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.