4 ms·

Snopes must be having a pretty high traffic month: http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-drone-strike/ http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-drone-strike/

• rfrank 10y ago
  lol snopes
  • nicholassmith 10y ago
    Yeah, because they're less trust worthy than True Pundit.
    • rfrank 10y ago
      They're on the same level. Does that make them both Arbiters Of Truth? Or is that lofty title reserved for PolitiFact and HRC's campaign page?
      • nicholassmith 10y ago
        They're an independent fact checking and analysis site and avoid political bias. Their entire schtick is impartial research of stories for truthiness, compromising ruins it.
        • rfrank 10y ago
          "avoid political bias" Their primary reporter, Kim LaCapria, "described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She trashed the Tea Party as “teahadists.” She called Bill Clinton “one of our greatest” presidents. She claimed that conservatives only criticized Lena Dunham’s comparison of voting to sex because they “fear female agency.” http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fact-checking-snopes-websites-political-fact-checker-is-just-a-failed-liberal-blogger/ http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fact-checking-snopes-websi...
  • pcwalton 10y ago
    I'm going to say again what I said yesterday: I'm really unhappy that this is what passes for discourse on HN now.
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    • JoeAltmaier 10y ago
      My own goal is to never talk about the other folks on a thread. That's never the topic. As a shorthand, I never use the word 'you' in a comment if I can help it. Keep it impersonal.
    • rfrank 10y ago
      k
    • ben0x539 10y ago
      How many words should one have to use to question snopes' credibility before it comes acceptable discourse? :(
    • huckyaus 10y ago
      It doesn't pass for discourse on HN - that's why it's been flagged into oblivion.