This here is called a messageboard, Cisco. You can go back and look at what people have said. Note the sentence of yours I quote. Note the complete and utter faithfullness with which I represent it. Where’s the total misrepresentation?
- a person takes the time to write a few lines, at least the person asking for a cite could make the effort to try to narrow in what it is he wants cited, rather than just reply with a blanket CITE. Here she doesn’t take the time to specify what of the five points in the quoted paragraph she wants a cite for. Perhaps she had no clue that in India and China there are some problems with “imbalance in the ratio of the sexes” or perhaps she has never heard of the idea that some people have speculated that the “drop in crimes rates may have been due in large part to abortion” or it is one of the other things she wants a cite? Who knows. In any case, such a lazy attitude is not worthy of response.
Yeah, see, that’s been answered, by me, kind of a lot in this thread. I’m not going to give you a one line answer to pick apart. Go back and read my posts and you will know exactly how I feel.
This was elaborated on 2 posts later. I don’t know what it’s going to take to get you to read the thread. I’m out of ideas.
See, this is the kind of weasel answer I hate. If you have answered it, then it’s very easy for you to either quote yourself, link to the post or give us the post #. But generally, when anyone give this answer, it means they have never specifically answer the question, and they are trying to weasel out of answering a direct question.
Now, perhaps you have made yourself clear here, I don’t know, I haven’t been following the back-and-forth between you two. But if you have made a specific answer to this question, then just quote yourself, link to the post or give us the post #. Thank you.
Letmethinkaboutitno. I’m not going to enable someone to nitpick my words in a thread they haven’t read. They are free to do whatever they like; it’s not my responsibility to hold their hand.
I didn’t say I haven’t read the thread, clearly I have.
But please go ahead and prove me wrong, show me that I have not been paying proper attention, and that you are not weaseling.
Let me get this straight: I’ve made 18 posts in this thread - in which I’ve made my feelings on the subject more than abudantly clear - and rather than go back and read them in context, you want me to requote them here to be picked apart out of context? The answer is no. Don’t be ridiculous.
I’m not really involved in this thread, but wanted to point out that actually, DrDeth did not ask you to do this at all. He said that a link to the post or a post number would be fine.
Ok, fine. In that case I agree that it is a reasonable request and I’ll gladly comply. Read all the posts listed here.
I see what you did there. A rickroll would have been funnier, though.
In other words, no, you have never given a specific reply and you don’t intend to.:rolleyes:
Ok dumbfuck, if I lay it all out on a silver platter for you, this one last fucking time, using things I’ve said IN THIS VERY THREAD, that are immediately available for your eyes right now, with extremely minimal effort - will you admit you’re full of shit and just being a dick, and apologize?
Take a chill tablet; Cisco is right. Many of you disagree, as evidenced by your CITE CITE CITE fucking CITE! mantra that has run wild in every other thread, and by your stated opposition in this thread, but his point is perfectly clear. It’s plain silly and rude to demand someone provide a citation for every stitch of information, opinion, working theory or speculation offered, especially when a two-second Google search can answer your questions. If I say New York City is the most populous city in the US, I’m not going to provide a link to the US Census Bureau to support my claim. If you don’t know that, look it up.
Some questions, as it has been noted, are not as cut-and-dried as “Which American city has the most people in it?” Let’s take Holder’s “nation of cowards” statement, for example, since that seems to be the latest cherry-picked statement out of an entire speech that everyone seems to have blown out of proportion. In response to this, someone could plausibly say, for example, “America has clearly made great strides in race relations, but we still have a way to go. First, I’m not sure if being a color-blind society is necessarily the correct way to go, but secondly, if it is, and that is our objective, we still have not reached that goal.”
Does a statement like this need to be followed up with, “CITE?!” The citation is called life. Are you really asking someone to cite 200 years of race relations? If you disagree with any part of the example statement, please state why you disagree, and if you have evidence to support your position, please feel free to provide it. If you would like to know how that conclusion was drawn, ask. This “cite” nonsense has gotten out of control. This kind of fuckery goes on 'round these parts with nauseating frequency. It’s true, I haven’t been around here for a while, but if any similarities remain, and that seems to be the case, people either need to learn how to use a search engine, or not ask for citations for completely ludicrous shit.
If a fact has been stated that can be easily (dis)proven, look it up. If you are looking to know where someone is getting information, or what thought process is in place to draw conclusions, ask. And if you think the person is just plain full o’ shit, then say so.
How do people who require constant citations have conversations at bars? When someone says something you don’t agree with, or states something whose truth you question, do you halt conversation entirely until someone can produce something from the internets to support the claim?
Well…yeah. You mean you don’t??
-XT
Only if the bar has internet access. I try to avoid bars that don’t.
I was kidding. 
But yeah…what else is WiFi for, ehe?
-XT
I was kidding too. I don’t use the intertrons at happy hour.
They do it the same way they do it here, but with different language. I refer you to my post #15:
I always figured it was a call for BS too; why “cite!!!111” is somehow preferable to “bull” is beyond me.
[QUOTE=MeanOldLady;10864801 *It’s plain silly and rude to demand someone provide a citation for every stitch of information, opinion, working theory or speculation offered, especially when a two-second Google search can answer your questions. If I say New York City is the most populous city in the US, I’m not going to provide a link to the US Census Bureau to support my claim. If you don’t know that, look it up.
…
Does a statement like this need to be followed up with, “CITE?!” The citation is called life. Are you really asking someone to cite 200 years of race relations? If you disagree with any part of the example statement, please state why you disagree, and if you have evidence to support your position, please feel free to provide it. If you would like to know how that conclusion was drawn, ask. This “cite” nonsense has gotten out of control.* [/QUOTE]
Ok, show me some recent threads where this sort of thing has been done. Other than the joke usage (which has gotten out of control a bit, I agree), it does not seem to be overly used. I just tried a search for “Cite?” in GD in the last week, and got no hits.