SNOOPS is snopes.
And I have seen a writing that snopes says does not exist.
I have only seen it two times. The first time was about 10 to 13 years ago, and then again on snopes site.
Seriously, if you are not going to tell us what it is, why are you wasting our time? Put up or shut up.
Well, colour me intrigued. Tell us more, B&I…
Regarding the newlywed game story…a few years ago I emailed them after the clip surfaced on a “funniest tv moments” type show. Actually I emailed them a good 6-9 months after the show aired.
Anyway, they repsonded and were total assholes about it. Basically not believing (which is understandable) that I could possibly be correct but going as far as to say “just because you think you saw it doesn’t mean it’s true”. I emailed them back saying “hey, not saying you’re wrong, just giving you a lead to check out”. Again they were total assholes saying they did not need to b/c that footage DID NOT exists.
Now it’s funny that they say "Is this the “smoking gun” urban legend aficionados have been waiting for? It’s hard to say for sure, " …well of course it is you assholes.
Last time I said what it was Revtim, I was given a load of shit for contradicting snopes so I feel like I am wasting MY time now but here goes.
Snopes says there was never a bilboard that read something like “If you think it is dry now, wait until … the DEA”
I saw that in a full page ad in a newspaper. I said to the snopes people that I have some information about the billboard thing. While it was not a billboard I have seen the same thing in a newspaper. They told me I was either a liar or out of my mind.
Happy
That was my experience too!
Snopes = Assholes
I also experienced The Wrath of Snopes’ Ego when I challenged them about something a while back.
I’ve noticed that Snopes tends to be very dismissive about anything having to do with race. For example, the idea that a singer, actor, or other celebrity might be racist, and might have once made a racist comment seems strike them as being outlandishly improbable. This doesn’t mean that those rumors are all true, of course, but they seem to have this idea that all celebrities have had all their personal biases magically removed.
Along with astorian and Bob55, I’d have to say that sometimes the Snopes team disappoints me when they try to put things in perspective. Sometimes? Usually, actually. It’s as though they assembled the facts, tried to assess the conclusion that the average intelligent person would draw, and then take a contrary stance.
They (Snopers, not Astorian and Bob55) can also be faulted for being a little to trusting with official sources - I wouldn’t consider the official corporate historian for Johnson Wax a disinterested party.
Additionally, they seem to pride themselves on, or at least make a point of, doing research on line and with phone calls to official spokespeople. How about digging up some original source material, guys?
The worst, though, is medical. Do they not know any doctors? Can they not go to a public library and look at the CDs or online subscriptions for medical journals. There are a couple of cases where their answer on health issues and legends about freak accidents are misleading or just plain wrong. Interesting to hear from the posters who mention getting “the treatment.” My own GP has pointed out more than one incorrect conclusion from Snopes, and urged me (why me?!) to contact them with the article or paper that proves that point. Perhaps they are often contacted by people who know better and dismiss academic and professional papers as not newsworthy or something???
The Snopes.com reputation should be enough to get their phone calls answered, if they bothered to call the CDC or sniffed around to find some old archivist working deep in the bowels of NBC.
Still, what we do without them! Better to have Snope with a few flaws than to be on my own when I’m trying to tell co-workers that the email is phony.
Actually - like many publishers, online and on paper, they toss in some “original material” to catch thieves. Anyone could argue that they, too, did such and such research to reach such and such conclusions about something true. It would be difficult to argue that your TV show about urban legends wasn’t ripping off Snopes if it contained a fictitious legend.
Thanks for the details. But if you didn’t want to “waste your time”, you shouldn’t have brought it up to begin with.
There is always hope. Looks like this time is was not a waste.
I was addressing the OP, you asked for more.
You’ve been on the board for over two years. You should know by now you cannot make vague accusations without backing them up. Providing rough details most certainly is not more than what would be reasonably required for an answer to the OP.
This thread is going a bit out of GQ territory. Kindly be civil or you will receive warnings.
If you can’t address the General Question here, avoid posting.
There shall be no further bickering in this thread.
Thank you for your cooperation.
-xash
General Questions Moderator
Sorry, vague stuff like that is a pet peeve of mine. My apologies.
Is it possible B & I, that the ad you saw was just a spoof of what just might be an urban legend, as shown here?
Since Snopes deals with a lot of stuff that people think they remember, they must gets tons of emails telling them they are wrong. I can see why they’d be assholish in their response, but that’s really no excuse. Better to not respond, or respond with a form letter about false memories, than to be a rude bastard.
I recall, from posting and lurking on the snopes MB for many months, that David and Barbara both are very caustic and very dry. I can imagine they would come across as assholes if you’re not used to their particular style of communicating, which isn’t rude, imo, just…well…dry.
Even if the Newlywed Game article is false. (I hope we mean the “interesting place you made whoopy” one) It at least makes you laugh. Its humor value does’nt lie… which in its own way is good enough sometimes.
Revtim, your post does not in any way, shape or form answer the OP. This, after you have been explicitly instructed to take your peeves out of GQ.
You have been warned. Do not do this again.
I shall repeat the OP:
-xash
General Questions Moderator
If you want to get someone to listen to you, try posting in alt.folklore.urban. There you’ll find a whole bunch of people who’ve heard it all before. But they have pretty high standards for evidence - if you tell them that you saw something that many people have been looking for for a long time with no success, then they’ll ask for a little more than “I know I saw it.” It gets down to this: which is more believable, that you are mistaken (people are mistaken about details like this all the time - eyewitness testimony is almost worthless), or that a huge search has found no evidence of something posted up for all to see. Most thoughtful people will think you’re mistaken.
On the other hand, most of these same people thought that people were mistaken when they thought they saw a woman tell Bob Eubanks “up the butt.” But the first is the rule, and this is the exception.
The OP asks
Blown & Injected asserted in an earlier post to this thread that
B&I. I will politely suggest that you are mis-remembering what you saw. If you truly think you saw it, then could you provide any help as to the newspaper, the approximate date(even the year would help). I don’t think you are a liar. You are just incorrect in your memory unless you can help us track down what you THINK you remember.
Diceman asserts that
Can you give a link to such an assertion?
Meeko asserts that
Why is it FALSE? What part?
CurtC said
WHEN did people first think they saw a woman tell Bob Eubanks “up the butt?” That has some value in the UL.