Take it to the Pit or something.
This is partly true. Discernment without field experience will satisfactory answer certain questions. However, attempting to answer more sophisticated questions with nothing more than the internet is irresponsible and dare I say extremely presumptuous. Having no experience in a subject impede’s one’s ability to read the sources critically. While a source may be well-written, its HTML may be professional, and its URL may appear to be a well-known organization, its content could of course be dead wrong.
In many instances, this is easy to catch. If a snazzy site on Anglo-Norman history, one of my areas of interest, happened to say that the Battle of Hastings took place in 1067, I would be justifiably dubious of the rest of the site. But to someone without any background in the subject, it would appear to be completely legitimate.
While it is very nice that there are people willing and able to do internet legwork, it is never a substitute for genuine critical knowledge. Hence the profusion of “IANA(insert profession of choice), but…” posts.
In other words, if the internet is one’s only source, one should not speak with authority.
My typos are trying to tell me something. Step away from the computer. Or at least proofread.
This is like watching a pyramid of cheerleaders collapse - on the one hand horrifying and painful, on the other you know that at least 50% of the people in the stands are trying to stifle their laughs.
Just thought I’d share…
I also appreciate DDG’s use of Google, even if I don’t agree with her every time. Sorry jar, but I don’t think this thread was constructive at all.
Also, Coldfire, why did you feel it necessary to address any “junior mod” actions by DDG here? Don’t you think that it might be humiliating to her to be shit on by a mod after being subjected to the OP? You’re a freakin mod, you have access to her e-mail even if normal posters don’t.
Well, Exgineer, I disagree slightly with your sentiment. I use Google all the time when answering GQ questions, although probably in a different way than Duck Duck Goose does.
-
When I answer questions in my area of expertise, I’ll try to find an appropriate Web page to reference, in case the OP wants further information. I figure maybe with my experience in the subject matter, I can find an appropriate page with less effort than other people can. (an example)
-
Often, a question will arise where, because of past experience, I’m nearly certain I know the correct answer. However, since I’m not an expert in that field, I’ll try to find a cite supporting my answer before I post. (an example)
-
Occasionally, there’ll be a question for which I don’t know the answer, but looks like an interesting question. So I spend some time trying to dig up some info, just because I’m interested. If I find something that seems appropriate, and no one else has answered, I’ll post it with some qualifications. I’m assuming that if and when an expert does come along, he or she can make use of that information. (an example)
In each of these cases, it seems to me that Googling for a Web page provides some usefulness to people that read the thread. I try to be conscientious about qualifying my level of expertise, although perhaps I could be better at it. Note, too, that sometimes there won’t be an expert in the field posting to a thread (like this thread on glitter production), so the rest of us have to muddle along.
Thank you, Tom, as always you make much sense. I booted Jar’s little heinie because it wasn’t fair for her to Pit me for nothing. If she Pits me for nothing again, I will in all likelihood boot her little heinie in exactly the same way, although probably not with the large-economy size “Cunt”.
Well, if you had really cared about me as a person, if your intent really had been to help me, you would have sat down and thought about it for a while. “Hmm,” you would have said to yourself. “DDG doesn’t have her e-mail address listed, and the mods don’t like to forward e-mails. How could I possibly post my constructive criticism to her? Hmm, I know she sometimes posts at Fathom and the Unaboard and the Pizza Parlor–maybe I’ll ask OpalCat or Una or the PP to forward it to her…”
Like that…
Or, of course, you could have simply posted it in MPSIMS. But then, that wouldn’t have given you an excuse for a fun Pit rant, and a three-page pileon, would it? All those Views, all those posts, much validation. :rolleyes:
For exactly the reason I gave at the time. She sounded like she was about to start a “lemme tell you about MY labor and delivery” horror story, which would inevitably lead to a "“lemme tell you about MY labor and delivery” horror story hijack, and I wanted to forestall that.
Also, isn’t it kind of Anahita’s place to discuss this? What’s it to YOU, what I said to HER?
Exgineer:
So, according to you, when Cuate wants to know,
–if I don’t actually know the answer off the top of my head, I shouldn’t go looking around on Google for it? I should just back out of the thread? So far he’s got one smartass answer and one vague not-very-helpful answer. Should I just leave him with that? “Too bad for him, maybe somebody who knows something about seal clubbing will come along”?
Erika wants to know
According to you, I shouldn’t google something like “how to frame oil paintings” and maybe find some information for her? I should just back out of the thread and hope that somebody who does know how to frame oil paintings will come along?
Arnold wants to know how jet-pacs work, and where he can get one. I shouldn’t bother looking it up for him?
JIHymas wants to know how marzipan is made, Weeks wants to know if it’s possible to grow olives in his front yard, PKBites has a cat health question, Lemur’s dog just ate a disposable diaper, BrightEyes wants to know when an island stops being an island and starts being a continent. Those are all the threads in today’s first two pages of GQ that I would probably be looking up. So according to you, if I don’t know right away what the answers to all these questions are, I shouldn’t bother looking them up?
One question: Why in the world not? Because I might get the wrong answer? Do I consistently post the wrong answer? Am I the poster who posts the very first link she finds, every time, and then the rest of the thread is full of posters saying, “Um, no, actually, that’s not right”?
Or because you feel it’s dishonest in some way, that you think it sounds like I’m pretending to know stuff that I don’t? I’ve never made any secret of the fact that I use Google–as a matter of fact, one of the reasons I kept saying, “Google is your friend” is because I didn’t WANT people to think I was some kind of Giant Brain Know-it-all. Ironic, huh? :rolleyes: And here I thought I was just being honest with people…“This is where I got my answer…”
And I’m certainly not the only one in GQ who Googles the answers and posts links to them.
I’m happy that you’re comfortable confining yourself to your areas of expertise, but I’ll tell ya, I’ve learned a helluva a lot more about the world through looking things up on Google for other people than I ever would have just sitting here and surfing the Internet by myself. If I’d waited until I was an entomologist to try to figure out what kind of bug that was for Nickrz, or waited until I had a degree in aviationa and I personally knew what really happened to TWA Flight 800, or waited until I knew from personal experience whether Jesse Jackson said he used to spit in the white folks’ food when he was working as a waiter (BTW, I had to go to the library to look that one up–not everything is on the Internet), I’d have missed some really neat stuff.
Um, what? 
Sorry if I stepped on your toes by using you as an example, Rob. 
I’m simply amazed at the number of people who think the OP was simply a rant against DDG’s googling.
You misspelled “googles”. Sorry, had to be done.
OK, fair enough. And no, I didn’t understand that from your previous post, but that may be just me.
Here in ATMB, you erroneously advise a poster to put a parody thread about a radio show in MPSIMS, and you wrongly advise the poster to refrain from using a name that can be related to the actual name of the radio show host at hand. You chose to interpret the rules, failed, and had to be corrected.
In this pit thread, you’re telling a poster one of the links he posted was too obscene for the SDMB, using a very poor and completely over the top analogy while you were at it. Mind you, this was after Lynn Bodoni had already removed another link from that OP, and obviously chose to let the still exisiting one remain.
I got those two links by searching on my username and the word “duck”, all forums, the past year.
There’s more examples in my memory, and I seriously would love to find the threads, but a search for your username in ATMB over the last year renders one hundred and thirteen threads, and quite frankly, I’m not going to scan them all.
I don’t know what I’ve proven now, or to which extent, but I certainly never said you were “pretending to be a staff member”. I merely told you you weren’t, and consequently, you shouldn’t answer questions in ATMB that require interpretations or extrapolations of the rules, rather than mere reproduction of them.
But hey, I guess drama isn’t my best suit. Sorry to disappoint.
DDG said:
Damn you and your knowledge hoarding- did he or didn’t he?
Anahita’s a friend of mine who is gone from the boards for a while and I know that it bothered her, and if you read that thread again, several people were bothered by your attempts to censor her. But I got my answer. You saw the thread going in a direction you didn’t like and attempted to change it. Fair enough.
And contrary to what you would like to believe I have no IDEA whether you post at Fathom or Unaboard, since I’ve only been to Fathom about three times in the past three years and I’ve never EVER in my LIFE been to Unaboard.
The Pit is for complaints. MPSIMS is not. Just because something is in the pit doesn’t mean it has to be a cunt riddled dog fight.
Nope, can’t buy that for a minute. What the heck is the difference between looking up something in a printed encyclopedia and (with discerning judgment, which is exactly what DDG provides) looking it up on the net? There are huge numbers of straightforward GQ questions that can be quickly and easily answered with a proper web search.
If you don’t want to answer GQ questions without personal knowledge, that’s your call to make. I usually stay away from that sort of thing myself. But unless DDG’s research is providing incorrect answers, there is no reasonable basis for a complaint. Last I checked, Cecil was hardly writing his column from personal knowledge, and more than a few of his cites were almost certainly gathered by Google.
Well, I put it in here because I agree to the OP to some extent with regards to the “junior mod” stuff, as it’s refered to here. Whether I “shat” on Duck Duck Goose, I’ll leave to the interpretation of the skilled readers of the SDMB: I personally think I voiced my criticism rather constructively. As for not doing it per e-mail -and you’re right in saying that I could have accessed DDG’s e-mail address-, the vicousness of her first reply certainly played a part in that. Potential humiliation doesn’t seem much of a factor when someone calls another poster a cunt in 72 point bold caps. I’m glad she retracted that particular part of her reply.
If your question is “what is the population of the United States,” then fine. Perhaps you recall that I drew the distinction between simple, one-fact answers and more sophisticated questions.
Duck Duck Goose, I agree that Maeglin could have, and probably should have, found a more recent example of your refusing to admit your wrong than from 22 months ago. But given that it was 22 months ago, I cannot even comprehend how you can STILL not admit you were wrong. Worse, you consider it to be a difference of opinion. It is not. It is a well established area of law and, while in the future it might be changed through some court’s ruling, for now it’s like you’re saying 2+2=4 is a matter of opinion. I can’t believe that two years later you still don’t understand this.
Also, let’s be honest. Do you really believe JarbabyJ should have known to go through Una in order to get to you? I mean, let’s be realistic here. Why should she even assume think about Una, let alone entertain the possibility she would send a message through her? Why not just ask Cecil or Ed to be her personal messenger? After all, you’ve given your e-mail address to them, right? I don’t think what you suggested was even a remotely plausible solution.
It can only help.
Not only will his arm get stronger, but, in time, he will forget that he was even injured. Also the hair on his palm will help him develope a new pitch, thus making him a better pitcher than he was before the injury.
And, there is no such thing as excessive wanking.
Masturbation: nature’s cure all.
Which is EXACTLY why I share office space with a fucknugget with a masters degree, rather than a fucknugget PhD.
Squink: Learn something about research will you? Spitting back data someone else collected is something an inbred primate can do. Taking that data and exploring what it means requires intellegence, skill and training. As I very snidely said a little while ago any idiot can type a phrase into a search engine and find revelent sounding pieces of informatin.
Here’s an example of research by search engine:
Cell phones admit radation.
Radiation causes tumors.
Cell phones are used next to your head.
Your brain is in your head.
!!! OH NO CELL PHONES CAUSE BRAIN TUMORS!
Well sure. But like I said, it was off the top of my head. And more importantly, is there a statute of limitations on things like this? Does an example need to be recent to be valid?
I don’t recall DDG giving medical advice or calculating stress loads on bridge abutments. Fact is (ha!) that most GQ questions involve straightforward fact questions, even if you sometimes have to put together a string of facts to get to the specific answer requested. And it’s not like you’ve got to be some sort of mutant supergenius to research your way to a solid answer of most factual questions. DDG does that admirably well.
Allow me to repeat myself: Unless her answers are wrong, you have no reasonable complaint that she posts those answers. None at all.