You’re right to an extent IzzyR, and I’ll appologize for the bit of a straw man argument there. But I will say that I’ve been surprised as some of the things that I thought I knew, but didn’t. Again, just using your statement as an example, if that is a fact that is easily obtainable from a reputable site, then (in my opinion), you should post a link to the site when you state the fact. Not because I personally think it may be wrong, but just because you’re putting it there as fact. And a specific fact at that. I don’t know what the debate was on, but while I may not argue that the average Chinese man is shorter than I am, and most probably under 5’ tall, if I had the stance that public transportation could be less expensive because they were all under 4’5", and therefore could be stacked 2 high, then I should have something backing that statement up. Not because everyone probably thinks the average height is 6’ or anything, but because I’m saying an exact measurement…if you see what I’m saying.
And I still stand by the assertation that if you’re (generic you) posting a “fact” that is easily googled, then you should probably go ahead and google it, and post the link.
Sometimes threads can surprise you. I posted a GQ thread that (apparently) could have been fairly easily googled, but it turned into a halfway decent conversation.
Granted, that conversation is probably better suited to IMHO than GQ, but still…
People should be allowed to report facts about things they believe they “know”, but cannot source.
However, they should try to make an effort to indicate that their assertion is potentially problematic.
Good analysts weigh evidence: they don’t pretend that all evidence is of equal quality. Similarly, good critics will try to bear down on the central core of another’s argument. Or at least they will distinguish between the core and the many tangents.
I agree. And I agree that “CITE!!” is over-used and abused. For what it’s worth, in a recent thread, I used the following defense with some degree of success:
I said to the guy “Ok, I’ll try to find a cite for X but before I do let me ask you – do you disagree with X?”
Another way to put it would be to say “Ok, I’ll try to find a cite for X but before I do, will you concede that if X turns out to be true, it would cast serious doubt on your position?”
Since the person knows, deep down, that X is probably true, he will be afraid to answer these questions. And if the person does have the guts to answer “yes,” I would probably spend a little time digging up an actual cite for him.
That the thread where Coldfire concluded “Lucwarm seems to be the leader of the pack, inasfar endurance despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary goes. And the others seem keen on feeding his quest.”?
There is certainly no excuse for lifting information verbatim from a site and then failing to provide the source.
I was accused of being impolite, not saying please, and playing Junior Mod. :rolleyes:
Since he violated copyright laws, failed to give credit to the author quoted and violated board rules, next time I will just report the post to a moderator. They are always polite.
If a participant cannot live up to what is expected in debating, the Pit is indeed a good place to whine – that, and your mama’s kitchen.
I would like to thank you, however, for the increased opportunities to fight ignorance
That would hardly be an effective tactic, given that most folks in Great Debates are civil enough to avoid making the request in a nasty way. In any event, it’s not a tactic that I’ve used. I assure you that the quote I pasted into the thread in question is from an actual article that I found online. Of course I cannot vouch for the veracity of the article – but I certainly did not fabricate the quote.
**
If I demonstrate that the quote is from an actual article, will you concede that you’re wrong? Then we’ll see who the “complete fucking idiot” is.
I note that you were able to locate the article in question without my providing a link. Thus you are complaining about something that is moot (while dodging my most recent question I might add).
**
I don’t believe I violated copyright or any board rules at all. (Sorry, the opinions of Junior Moderators with an axe to grind don’t matter to me.) But if I did break any rules, I’d love to know about it.
So why don’t you report the post in question to the mods? I dare you. I double-doggie dare you.
But before you do it, you might check your own posts . . . I ran a search and found that just a few weeks ago, you posted a 100+ word excerpt from the San Francisco Chronicle. Shocking behaviour from a Junior Mod. (Or perhaps you had permission from the Chron. Editorial Board?)
Fucking hell, I’d seen the thread that Zoe referred to and your idiosyncratic demuring but had thought little of it.
In the link you gave, Zoe referenced a source for her quote, previously she had said
, which really was an objection to you posting unattributed and copyrighted material, but with the emphasis being on the unattributed.
The thing is, an small attributed quote is considered to fall outside the purposes of the copyright laws and is considered “fair use”, the only complaint against you was that you had quoted yet not attributed.
Perhaps Zoe can explain what she really meant when she accused me of violating the copyright laws, i.e. perhaps she can do her own weaseling.
Besides, it’s hard to see why Zoe should object merely to the lack of a link, given that she found the actual article without one.
**
Kindly cite a statute or judicial decision holding that “fair use” does not apply when a commentator is quoted but not identified.
If that is indeed the law, then I’ll admit I’m in the wrong here.
(And yeah, it’s kind of ironic that I’m demanding a cite in a thread concerning the same. But it’s not a rhetorical device: I am truly skeptical that the law is as you seem to claim it is.)
