17 Feb 2014 3:45 pm
I generally give my own opinion and analysis of the facts and data as I see it and back it up with raw data when I can. Occasionally, I will defer to an expert opinion when I am a bit shy on personal expertise.
I find there's a few here do one of three things to excess.
1) Like the board's village idiot, clem, when they're backed into a corner by a barrage of demands to back up their bizarre, unsupportable ****, they link to the same biased opinion generator who gave them the bizarre, unsupportable ****.
I grade them accordingly with an F-
2) Some only give opinion and never link to a source for data or opinion to support it. D+ as I give a them credit for possibly having some anecdotal or life experience with the issue. But it depends on how intelligent I deem them to be. The real **** like truthwarrior get the same F- as clem.
3) Some give links to sources that have no earthly connection to their claim or actually support the opposite position. The main offender is consistently graded below par and NEVER manages a hole in one.
It's strangely satisfying to know that their intentions are sincere. Clem, as it's now been revealed, actually BELIEVES that the best source is the opinion piece written by a conservative who gets paid to skew the raw data in favor of his employer. I'd hate to think he was trying to actually convince anyone that his ideas had merit.
Anyone want to venture a guess as to who voted for option #2?
I find there's a few here do one of three things to excess.
1) Like the board's village idiot, clem, when they're backed into a corner by a barrage of demands to back up their bizarre, unsupportable ****, they link to the same biased opinion generator who gave them the bizarre, unsupportable ****.
I grade them accordingly with an F-
2) Some only give opinion and never link to a source for data or opinion to support it. D+ as I give a them credit for possibly having some anecdotal or life experience with the issue. But it depends on how intelligent I deem them to be. The real **** like truthwarrior get the same F- as clem.
3) Some give links to sources that have no earthly connection to their claim or actually support the opposite position. The main offender is consistently graded below par and NEVER manages a hole in one.
It's strangely satisfying to know that their intentions are sincere. Clem, as it's now been revealed, actually BELIEVES that the best source is the opinion piece written by a conservative who gets paid to skew the raw data in favor of his employer. I'd hate to think he was trying to actually convince anyone that his ideas had merit.
Anyone want to venture a guess as to who voted for option #2?