Well that thread is going fine and it has the potential to be a classic. Still I’m a tiny bit disappointed. I dropped Godwin’s Law into it and not even a single bite. :smack:
Hitler liked leopards.
Eva Braun must have been unhappy about that.
You’re swimming with the snarks now, boy.
So that’s why I beat my best time in the hundred freestyle yesterday!
(see Sept. mini-rants to see why that’s a lie)
I thought it kind of sad he thought all those thread views were a sign that poeple were sincerely interested in his cites and his totally meaningless obsession with lions and tigers.
There’s so much more to life! Like, well, having one.
This video was quoted in one of his cites.
Possibly **My Lord ** is taking “What I tell you three times is true” too much to heart.
I don’t like chimps…I made a deal with a chimp once.
See? Tigers and lions, they’re lovers, not fighters.
What’s wrong with that? 
It’s an omissive apostrophe, the short form of DOG WHO IS VERY FEROCIOUS
Or DOG WHO IS SLEEPING AND YOU MAY TRIP OVER
Can I claim credit for killing the thread with my Liliger post? Or am I being naive, and it’s simply that the internet has been emptied of cites?
I am very disappointed at the lack of updates in the thread. If you want to take the blame, feel free. I choose to believe that he is redoubling his efforts and will bring us more cites to prove his point that, um, well something. I’m not sure I could pick up what his point was. Something about cites I think.
I thought we had a rule about people using the board as their own personal blog. This sounds like an A1 example of same to me.
Seconded. And it’s not like there are never “What animal would win that fight?” regular threads. For once we get the answer, and properly cited, not based on guesswork. That’s of limited usefulness, but you could argue it’s proper ignorance-fighting, in fact.
And you never know when your life might depend on picking the correct side between a lion and a tiger. After all, the straightdope taught me for instance not to eat polar bear’s liver too and many equally “useful” “facts”. I find vaguely interesting to know that a lion would likely win if pitched against a tiger. Finally, I wouldn’t be much surprised if many a scholar was dedicating his whole life to studying an equally silly topic that somehow fascinates him.
Once again Dopers prove their nastiness is only constrained by whether it’s allowed, rather than whether it’s deserved.
Dude is definitely a bit touched, god bless his little ol’ soul.
But the funniest part to me is that, on a messageboard stupposably dedicated to fighting ignorance, the greatest collection of information about any topic just happens to be about lions v. tigers.
Is this getting overlooked, being buried amongst 485,629 cites? Or is everyone in on it but me?
Post # 246 on that thread: