Well, I certainly don’t smell. Not bad, anyway. No more than yo momma, in any case. 
Jarbaby certainly has her over-the-top moments, but I don’t think her OP is one of them, not even remotely. To me, it’s a waste of space to perform google searches for people. I spend a fair amount of time in GQ - probably more than anywhere else, frankly - and like others here I keep my posts to things I already know about. If I google something, it’s because I’m refreshing my memory, or searching for a particularly relevant sub-term, etc.
DDG’s posts are right much more often than not, but the not happens just often enough to make me question whether they’re really value-added. And once that question arises, well, it’s self-fulfilling - I don’t entirely trust her posts, so I’m likely to do my own research anyway if it’s a question that interests me.
That DDG’s response is so fanatical suggests that some breathing’s in order. In no way should critiques the level of the OP’s cut to the core of a person’s being.
Very well, Minty and Fenris, and Ino–upon reflection, I will withdraw the large economy-sized “cunt”. I am sorry I called Jarbaby a “cunt”.
But I don’t have any idea what she expected by way of a response from me. “Gee, Jar, thanks for the input, sorry I’ve been irritating, I promise to change my behavior to conform to your expectations”? I never said a word to her about her incessant sex talk. Live and let live, I thought. It’s her schtick, it’s the way she posts, it makes her happy, it’s fine, no skin off my nose. So she’s got no right to drag me in here for, basically, the same thing. It’s one thing to Pit posters like Justhink for their posting style, but just because somebody’s “too helpful”? Or “uses a search engine too much”? Jar’s the one who needs to take a chill pill.
If she really wanted to discuss this, she could have sent it to Una, who could have forwarded it to me in a PM.
And actually, although nobody seems to have noticed, somebody did mention to me a while back (tactfully) that I should stop saying “Google is your friend”, or otherwise making references to Google in the post, so by and large, I have, except where I thought it was pertinent to tell the OP what search terms I had used, like where the OP says, “I couldn’t find anything on Google”, and then I do find something, I tell him what I searched under.
<< goggles in amazement >>
What part of that did you not understand? Here’s what you said, again.
And I said, “Cite?” That means, prove that I often “go beyond factual answers”. Prove that I often “try to get into the heads of mods and admins.” Prove that I am “often wrong”. Prove that I “have had to be corrected”.
Prove it. Or else quit raggin’ on my ass about “pretending to be a staff member”.
I know sports and masturbation.
I can answer most questions on these subjects without having to google first.
Since you perhaps aren’t reading what I posted, I guess I’ll ask again:
Why did you tell Anahita not to post about childbirth in that thread?
And while we’re at it, what forum SHOULD I post criticism in?
And how in the WORLD would I have known to do that?
Also, I like to think I’ve brought my ‘incessant’ sex talk down quite a bit in the past year. If you disagree, I’m sorry to hear it.
Thanks for retracting the cunt comment.
J
I’m not sure this is the response she was looking for, but the following could have worked:
Well, I’m sorry you feel that way, but I actually enjoy looking up answers on Google and providing them to people who are seeking such answers. I’m not violating any policies here at the SDMB, so I’m afraid you’ll just either need to ignore my posts, or try not to be annoyed by them.
Thanks for the clarification. (And it’s lno, not Ino – think of it like “Does lno go into a berserker rage when his name is misspelled? 'ell, no!”)
Hey Goose, I can’t email you, so I’ll go ahead and make public what was going to be a personal note to you:
I appreciate you. I like you. I’m glad you post here.
I understand your frustration, and your anger. It sucks major ass to see a thread like this, especially when the bulk of the immediate responses to it were personal sniping reminiscent of a pack of junior high kids with a hardon for you. I don’t know what your past history is with Hama, jessica, and whoever, or why they seem to have it in for you personally. And I don’t much care; it still sucks regardless of their motivations.
That said, please step back for a bit. Let them finish whatever it is they’re doing and move on, and stop responding in kind. There have been some valid points made, and I think it’s always important to see how others view you, but I know you can’t see them when all you’re seeing is red. And seeing red means you can’t see anything positive here at all, and will only end up pissing off other people.
Please feel free to email me any time. I want this shindig to end, and I want you to keep posting, and I don’t want to see anyone drive you off these boards.
Peace.
-andros-
(Now, I wonder if I’ve just made some enemies for that . . . .)
Wait…I thought you were Dutch.
Your response to my post was actually more to the point of my post than my post was, hardygrrl.*
I lurk a lot more than I post, and I learn a lot here just reading threads form people who actually know what they’re talking about, like you. If I thanked everbody for fighting my ignorance when I learned something here I’d nave more posts than Coldfire.
Speaking of whom, I just realized he wanted a whole thread.
Does that mean you’re not using the aftershave I gave you for Christmas?
I’m very, very hurt.
Will excessive wanking help or hurt a pitcher’s recovery from a rotator cuff injury?
Let’s ask Rick Ankiel
What if he changes hands?
Curse you, monster, for making the answer I was going to, and better worded at that.
Anecdote: The very first game I reviewed had a large following but the game itself sucked. I said as much (better wording; I like to think I’m a good reviewer). I got hate mail like you’ve never seen. Here’s how I handled my reader mail:
- Positive response - happy email back
- Negative but polite response - happy email back thanking them for reading and taking the time to write. No apologies or clarifications for my score.
- Negative and hateful response - delete unread
If you felt jar’s OP was #3, ignoring this thread completely would’ve been the best thing possible.
COS: I’ll go ahead and add this while I’m at it. I like it when DDG Google’s good links in a GQ question I have. I’m very good with a search engine, but sometimes I can’t find something. So when someone who’s better at it than me shows me where to find it, I very much appreciate it.
Well, you could have done a google search. 
Also, add me to the list of people who assume that most of the people who are answering GQ questions have some actual knowledge or expertise in that area.
Regarding the following observations:
I would have to note (as a regular “abuser” of Google, myself) that one does not get decent answers by simply dropping a thread title into Google (or even the nouns and verbs of the topic sentence in the first paragraph). There is, as mtgman has already noted, a fair amount of knowledge, logic, and discernment required both to formulate the correct search arguments and to select the appropriate links from the 352,085 hits that Google returns in order to correctly answer a question. It also requires (and DDG has demonstrated that she does this well) a sufficent grasp of the returned material to allow one to put it into a coherent form. I recall very, very few responses by DDG that amounted to a mere posting of links. Even when she resorts to simply links and quotes, the quotations are pertinent to the discussion and the selection and highlighting of those quotations requires more than an ability to “drop a title into Google,” requiring also an ability to select the correct quotes that will actually answer the question.
I also disagree with the assumption that every question asked has alrady been Googled. Lots of folks post in GQ who are simply not comfortable relying on search engines (perhaps lacking DDG’s skills in getting valid responses). I have even Googled questions where the OP explicitly stated that he or she had Googled the topic, only to find that my search skills were sufficiently good that I found what they had missed.
That said, DDG, please consider this. There is no one on this MB who does not irritate someone. (Possibly excepting Polycarp–and certainly not excepting Cecil.) It comes with the territory of having several thousand people bumping into each others’ thoughts, views, expressions, and styles on a daily basis.
If I may suggest: don’t take it so personally as to require that much anger to respond. I am not suggesting that you pretend that some of the comments were not meant as hateful or inflammatory, but the energy to respond with as much venom as you are investing is probably counterproductive. (And this might carry over to other threads where, recently, I have also detected more acerbity than you had previously demonstrated.)
A couple of witty ripostes, followed by a regal silence will serve you better, in the long run. (I am addressing your peace of mind, not your “winnng or losing” a Pit thread.) I am not going to judge any of the “anti” posts or posters in this thread. Some have been well-intentioned; some have been jerks. My only suggstion is that it is better for you to consider the more rational complaints–dismissing them if you feel that they are incorrect, considering them if you feel that they may have raised a valid observation–and move on without continuing or exacerbating the general level of hostility and anger.
Please tell me I wasn’t the only one who read this:
as << googles in amazement >>
Damn you and your reason, Tom~.
Dude, if those were criteria for a pitting, I’d have been pitted no less than half a dozen times, easily, for offenses ranging from unpopular stances to attention-whoring to drive-by posting. And it hasn’t happened yet.
Thanks for the mention, DDG.
Robin