In a message dated 10/22/2008 4:59:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time, snowspinner@gmail.com writes:
This ethic that people are responsible for our not fucking up their articles has rightly been considered offensive by numerous actual people.>>
-------------- Except Phil you make it seem like we are responsible for what our sources state. And we're just not.
We're responsible to use sources that are reliable. But if they say "Britney Spears likes cheese" other then being silly, we're not responsible for them saying it, and we can cite it without guilt :0 **************Play online games for FREE at Games.com! All of your favorites, no registration required and great graphics – check it out! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1211202682x1200689022/aol?redir= http://www.games.com?ncid=emlcntusgame00000001)
On Oct 22, 2008, at 8:02 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/22/2008 4:59:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time, snowspinner@gmail.com writes:
This ethic that people are responsible for our not fucking up their articles has rightly been considered offensive by numerous actual people.>>
Except Phil you make it seem like we are responsible for what our sources state. And we're just not.
We're responsible to use sources that are reliable. But if they say "Britney Spears likes cheese" other then being silly, we're not responsible for them saying it, and we can cite it without guilt :0
Perhaps you can cite it without guilt. I, on the other hand, tend to take seriously the responsibility of writing content for a top ten website, and tend to believe that spreading untrue information, no matter where it came from, is an irresponsible and at times immoral thing to do on a top ten website.
But if your conscience is clear and you're willing to divest all responsibility to others for what you say, more power to you. I can understand why someone about whom you're saying untrue things would be pissed, however.
Lord knows I would be.
-Phil