# Searches and incorrect conclusions

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/searches-and-incorrect-conclusions/528165>\
**Category:** The BBQ Pit\
**Created:** [February 8, 2010, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/searches-and-incorrect-conclusions/528165 "2010-02-08T18:08:02Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 85

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![zut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zut/32/2875_2.png) [@zut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zut)\
**Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/searches-and-incorrect-conclusions/528165/85 "2010-02-09T17:46:21Z")

</div>

> [@not\_alice](#):
>
> All [of his posts] up until where I read yesterday [were not about child porn]. They were about the borders of Free Speech between the US and Australia. They were no more about child porn then my posts were. [Bracketed material added by me, of course.]

I imagine that explains the disconnect, then. I would characterize the following post (for example) as “being about child porn”:

> [@Australian Free Speech Issues](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/australian-free-speech-issues/525298/113):
>
> Provide one, and let’s see how it holds up. Specifically, give an example where it is sufficiently clear exactly what is occuring in the scene, rather than just general “um…kids are having sex”. Let’s see if you can avoid manufacturing kiddie porn right here.

…whereas you would characterize it as _not_ being about child porn. I suggest most people might agree with me, and further suggest you consider tailoring your arguments to take that into account.

> [@not\_alice](#):
>
> No, you are the one insisting that thread is about child porn.

Neither true, nor responsive. One more time: Do you actually think that “some sort of news specifically regarding legal vs. illegal porn in Australia” is the same thing as “a very current proposal regarding a country-wide internet firewall a la China for Australia”? Do you understand why I’m asking this?

> [@not\_alice](#):
>
> So fucking what? I like discussing open source software. We all like discussing something.

The point is **Cesario** likes discussiong child porn. Do you agree or disagree?

> [@not\_alice](#):
>
> You would not be bothered by his posts in that thread if they had someone else’s name on them - and you didn’t even know about the thread until Giraffe falsely used it to raise your ire. How does it feel to be used like that for Giraffe’s own purposes?

Eh. First of all, I didn’t know about that thread until _you started this thread._ I really don’t think you’re in a credible position to complain about me noticing that thread when you’re the one that brought it up. Second of all, the only reason I posted here at all was because you were factually incorrect about that thread. Third of all, I can call **Giraffe** a retard if that will make you feel better.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/searches-and-incorrect-conclusions/528165)._