ahhh good one.
as if the ol' wikipedia link ftw wasnt stupid enough, they use google 😂
its especially sad when in reference google for proper spelling. i actually had a couple of people do that. one was an argument over a word which is spelled 2 ways, so rather than accept this and move on, they decided to type their favorite and more frequently used spelling of the word in google to prove that it had more hits, and thus the other spelling was wrong, according to their logic.
Originally posted by PVS
ahhh good one.as if the ol' wikipedia link ftw wasnt stupid enough, they use google 😂
its especially sad when in reference google for proper spelling. i actually had a couple of people do that. one was an argument over a word which is spelled 2 ways, so rather than accept this and move on, they decided to type their favorite and more frequently used spelling of the word in google to prove that it had more hits, and thus the other spelling was wrong, according to their logic.
Are you talking about Whirlysplat and me? You have to understand that when dealing with Whirlysplat that the more idiotic tactic was the only way to get through to him. It was more a situation of treating him th esame way he treated everyone else, to address him with the same attitude he addressed everyone else. He pretended to be stupid just to irritate people. So why not use an equally idiotic tactic to get under his skin? And I'm sure you recall the end result of pissing him off. Over a month of constant gay bashing threads. Unless of coarse you aren't talking about us.
i wasnt talking about you. i was being honsest when saying it involved me. i wont get into specifics since i already managed to break the rule of the topic. i just figured it was so long ago that even the party in question and witnesses would have forgotten. i, in fact forgot all about it until xyz jogged my memory.
it was a ridiculous exchange which lasted 3 pages of nonesense and dodging of the point and blind defense of spelling nazism ad nausium in spite of the truth: both spellings of the word were correct. this poster refused to accept it and eat their humble pie and instead tirelessly rebutted in a mad dash to have the last word (be saved by whatever moderator finally interjected and ended it before they had to break down and admit they were being foolish).
Originally posted by PVSI have to disagree, Wikipedia, although not always accurate, is an accepltable reference. I'm talking about time when you ask someone where they got the information they copy and pasted or just talked about and reply with www.google.com.
ahhh good one.as if the ol' wikipedia link ftw wasnt stupid enough, they use google 😂
its especially sad when in reference google for proper spelling. i actually had a couple of people do that. one was an argument over a word which is spelled 2 ways, so rather than accept this and move on, they decided to type their favorite and more frequently used spelling of the word in google to prove that it had more hits, and thus the other spelling was wrong, according to their logic.
[edit]
Wikipedia is not in any way or form an acceptable reference!
It is important that this is made very clear. It is not designed as reference material, it is not accepted as a good reference by any worthwhile academic institution, and even the founder of Wikipedia has directly told people not to use it as a a reference source.
He was pretty blunt about it, too, saying:
“For God sake, you’re in college; don’t cite the encyclopedia.â€
If a Wikipedia article is actually worthwhile, it will give its sources. Use those sources, not wiki itself.
Originally posted by Deano
Ush is the kinda person that if i said the sun was green,he write a 600 page essay telling me otherwise
That isn't much of an insult - if he is right, as he would be in debating a claim the sun is green (in terms of most color spectrum's) he would be justified in posting as much as he liked in debunking such a statement, and judging from the quality of Ush's posts it would most likely all be relevant to the argument.
Now if it was in defense of a stance that was incorrect then it would be something else.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Would you rather talk it over with someone like me? If we both see a glass of water. You'll say is half full...I'll say is half empty. 😉
which would mean neither of you researched it. if it was full and then emptied half way, it would half empty. if it was empty and filled halfway, it would be half full.
Originally posted by PVS
which would mean neither of you researched it. if it was full and then emptied half way, it would be half empty. if it was empty and filled halfway, it would be half full.
what if you've been drinking and decided to piss in the glass because you're at a tailgate party with no bathroom around?