The Big Cat Posted May 11, 2009 Author Posted May 11, 2009 Really? Do you need a head transplant? If you're doing a paper go to a source that is actually relevent to the paper you're writing. Unless the paper is titled Village Idiots - Myth or Legend you're barking up the wrong tree skippy. No, message boards--like Wikipedia--aren't a source, you are right about that. Howerver, what they are, and what I use them for is a starting point. I missed the part when you lambasted Tim Graham for soliciting this message board for the work he gets PAID to do. You know, something all the sports writers who still have jobs do from time to time.
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 You're operating under the false assumption that I'm proceeding without double checking a source. You do realize this is a paper on Woodward and Bernstein, yes? No, I didn't assume you weren't double-checking. I assumed I couldn't know either way. That is not a false assumption. Lesson #2 in research: the quailty of your results is directly proportional to your understanding of your assumptions. Are you assuming your sources are good? And yes, I know it's about Woodward and Bernstein...it was easy enough to figure that out from your questions (which in itself tells me that you haven't done a very good job at your own research, otherwise you wouldn't be asking such basic questions). That's why I specifically told you to avoid All The President's Men (a book by Woodward and Bernstein about Watergate is not necessarily a good primary source for information about Woodward and Bernsteins role in Watergate). I instead recommended two other sources that are likely to discuss the role of the media in Watergate, and specifically so you could check the citations within as a starting point. That, right there, is a hell of a lot of help to someone who knows how to use it - really, proabably more than you deserve, with your attitude. I know you think you're special, because you're in school and writing papers. Try to remember that you're hardly the first person to ever do that.
The Big Cat Posted May 11, 2009 Author Posted May 11, 2009 No, I didn't assume you weren't double-checking. I assumed I couldn't know either way. That is not a false assumption. Lesson #2 in research: the quailty of your results is directly proportional to your understanding of your assumptions. Are you assuming your sources are good? And yes, I know it's about Woodward and Bernstein...it was easy enough to figure that out from your questions (which in itself tells me that you haven't done a very good job at your own research, otherwise you wouldn't be asking such basic questions). That's why I specifically told you to avoid All The President's Men (a book by Woodward and Bernstein about Watergate is not necessarily a good primary source for information about Woodward and Bernsteins role in Watergate). I instead recommended two other sources that are likely to discuss the role of the media in Watergate, and specifically so you could check the citations within as a starting point. That, right there, is a hell of a lot of help to someone who knows how to use it - really, proabably more than you deserve, with your attitude. I know you think you're special, because you're in school and writing papers. Try to remember that you're hardly the first person to ever do that. Our source FOR THE CLASS was All the President's Men. And this particular paper isn't even that "involved." It's supposed to be a reaction piece, not a research piece. 800-1000 words, not the 10-12 pagers I was expected to crank out as as undergrad. Any "information" gathered here would have been supplemental, at best.
Chef Jim Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 No, message boards--like Wikipedia--aren't a source, you are right about that. Howerver, what they are, and what I use them for is a starting point. I missed the part when you lambasted Tim Graham for soliciting this message board for the work he gets PAID to do. You know, something all the sports writers who still have jobs do from time to time. Of course I didn't labast Tim Graham. Reasons are 1. I don't know who he is. 2. I don't post on the site for sports so I have no idea what you're talking about. And I'm not bagging on you for using a message board as a starting place, I bagging on you for using this one.
Chef Jim Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 Our source FOR THE CLASS was All the President's Men. And this particular paper isn't even that "involved." It's supposed to be a reaction piece, not a research piece. 800-1000 words, not the 10-12 pagers I was expected to crank out as as undergrad. Any "information" gathered here would have been supplemental, at best. Oh so it's a book report. This is for the that Oprah club isn't it?
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 Our source FOR THE CLASS was All the President's Men. That'll convince me, as someone who's also read All The President's Men for a class, that while it's a good primary source about Watergate, it is not necessarily for discussing their role in Watergate. Lesson 3: citing arguments to authority is even worse than citing Wikipedia. And I certainly hope that that wasn't your ONLY source for the class. Even better reason to look into the two books I referenced, and their sources. Lesson 4: double-check your assumptions with alternate, preferably disagreeing sources (and yes, I do that too. Don't assume I don't just because I don't make a public spectacle of it.)
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 This thread is begging for someone to ask Big Cat if he's missing a chromosome or just continually wanting attention. Where is "Cutting Drew With Dignity" these days?
The Big Cat Posted May 11, 2009 Author Posted May 11, 2009 This thread is begging for someone to ask Big Cat if he's missing a chromosome or just continually wanting attention. Where is "Cutting Drew With Dignity" these days? Actually, it's an extra chromosome that makes you stupid.
Chef Jim Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 This thread is begging for someone to ask Big Cat if he's missing a chromosome or just continually wanting attention. Where is "Cutting Drew With Dignity" these days? Like I told him several weeks ago. He really needs to archive these and break them out at his 40th birthday party. It would make the pain of turning 40 not hurt so bad.
Chef Jim Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 Actually, it's an extra chromosome that makes you stupid. I know you are, but what am I. Thanks for the fun but lunch is over, I've got work to do now.
The Big Cat Posted May 11, 2009 Author Posted May 11, 2009 I know you are, but what am I. Thanks for the fun but lunch is over, I've got work to do now. Don't be jealous, you were young once too. Get over it.
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 Actually, it's an extra chromosome that makes you stupid. It's a reference to the last time someone asked us to do their homework. Before your time, I know. Important point made somewhere in that thread (by Ghost of BiB) that the learning the process of doing the work is as important as the work itself. Your paper you're writing is a waste of many hours of your life if you half-ass it. The paper's ephemeral, learning the process by which you write it is something that will stick with you the rest of your life. And my uncle has Down's. An extra doesn't make you stupid, it makes you retarded.
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 Don't be jealous, you were young once too. Get over it. Youth is so !@#$ing wasted on the young.
Bad Lieutenant Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 It's a reference to the last time someone asked us to do their homework.. I can't believe you just referenced a 5 and a half year old thread. That's just sad. Maybe you should take a deep breath, pry yourself away from the keyboard, and go get some fresh air. There's more to life than just meta-message board discussions.
Chef Jim Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 I can't believe you just referenced a 5 and a half year old thread. That's just sad. Maybe you should take a deep breath, pry yourself away from the keyboard, and go get some fresh air. There's more to life than just meta-message board discussions. Yeah you're right. It's so hard to do and that thread is very obscure around here.
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 I can't believe you just referenced a 5 and a half year old thread. That's just sad. Maybe you should take a deep breath, pry yourself away from the keyboard, and go get some fresh air. There's more to life than just meta-message board discussions. I can't believe you just wasted time posting that.
Bad Lieutenant Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 I can't believe you just wasted time posting that. I can't believe you didn't try to compare it to something posted here 6 years ago.
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 I can't believe you didn't try to compare it to something posted here 6 years ago. Last line: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...st&p=207730 That was hard. Another whole two minutes out of my day.
erynthered Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 I can't believe you didn't try to compare it to something posted here 6 years ago. Probably because there's about 10K references about you that begin with retard. No sense linking all those links. Use the search engine...........wait never mind.........above your pay scale, sorry. Fries are done, get back to work, boy.
IDBillzFan Posted May 11, 2009 Posted May 11, 2009 Last line: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...st&p=207730 That was hard. Another whole two minutes out of my day. Man, just another T-Bone beatdown.
Recommended Posts