4 ms·

FWIW, I've just hit the 'donate' button. This is a resource that deserves to be defended.

codezero 7y ago
For all the sanity snopes has brought to the internet I’m surprised it’s been so long and I never have donated to them. I dropped $50. Thanks for the good advice :)
- GhettoMaestro 7y ago
  That money will be blown on hookers, most likely.
  - codezero 7y ago
    Are you making a moral judgement, or something else? I don't usually get a say in what happens to my money once it leaves my pocket, I also apparently don't have the information you have, but if I did, I'm not sure it would change my decision. Is the current Snopes team known for their purchasing of hookers? That's also totally legal in lots of places, again, not that I care. What point are you trying to make?
    - GhettoMaestro 7y ago
      Yes, this a moral judgement: Blowing company money on hookers, especially while cheating on your wife, is a bad thing. The point I am making is that Snopes was/is horribly mis-managed and should not be given any money. Don't waste your money on fools. Snopes at its heart is compromised.
      - codezero 7y ago
        If the company money becomes part of the individual's compensation, I don't see how it matters. Also, this sounds super speculative. As far as I can tell David Mikkelson has been accused of these things, by his former wife. They may be true, but I don't have any evidence of that, I'm especially sensitive to the fact that in a situation like a messy divorce, lots of bad things start flying around. I couldn't find any of this coming to a legal conclusion that indicates the above accusations were true. It seems like it would be easy to show if he used company funds for personal trips, etc... the cheating/prostitute purchases probably harder to prove. I'd be curious to know how you buy anything if you can't spend money at places where adulterers work. I acknowledge that's kind of a sarcastic question, but it seems like you have more of a problem with Snopes than the owner, which is fair (but I acknowledge I'm putting words into your mouth and don't intend to walk away from this believing my assumption).
      - Angostura 7y ago
        Can you show anything regarding the actual output of Snopes that suggests its editorial output has been compromised?
nicpottier 7y ago
Threw in $50 as well.
thrower123 7y ago
At this point, this is throwing good money after bad. The damage has been done to their credibility, and it would take drastic action to be a credible arbiter of reality once more.
- codezero 7y ago
  I don't keep up on things, what has Snopes done to damage their credibility?
  - Angostura 7y ago
    Suggested that certain statements from the current president and his cohort may, on occasion, lack credibility, presumably.
    - thrower123 7y ago
      Getting in pissing contests with well-known humor and satire sites was more what I had in mind. It just makes them look petty and small. They aren't as depraved as Politifact, at least.
      - Angostura 7y ago
        Link?

For all the sanity snopes has brought to the internet I’m surprised it’s been so long and I never have donated to them. I dropped $50. Thanks for the good advice :)

GhettoMaestro 7y ago
That money will be blown on hookers, most likely.
- codezero 7y ago
  Are you making a moral judgement, or something else? I don't usually get a say in what happens to my money once it leaves my pocket, I also apparently don't have the information you have, but if I did, I'm not sure it would change my decision. Is the current Snopes team known for their purchasing of hookers? That's also totally legal in lots of places, again, not that I care. What point are you trying to make?
  - GhettoMaestro 7y ago
    Yes, this a moral judgement: Blowing company money on hookers, especially while cheating on your wife, is a bad thing. The point I am making is that Snopes was/is horribly mis-managed and should not be given any money. Don't waste your money on fools. Snopes at its heart is compromised.
    - codezero 7y ago
      If the company money becomes part of the individual's compensation, I don't see how it matters. Also, this sounds super speculative. As far as I can tell David Mikkelson has been accused of these things, by his former wife. They may be true, but I don't have any evidence of that, I'm especially sensitive to the fact that in a situation like a messy divorce, lots of bad things start flying around. I couldn't find any of this coming to a legal conclusion that indicates the above accusations were true. It seems like it would be easy to show if he used company funds for personal trips, etc... the cheating/prostitute purchases probably harder to prove. I'd be curious to know how you buy anything if you can't spend money at places where adulterers work. I acknowledge that's kind of a sarcastic question, but it seems like you have more of a problem with Snopes than the owner, which is fair (but I acknowledge I'm putting words into your mouth and don't intend to walk away from this believing my assumption).
    - Angostura 7y ago
      Can you show anything regarding the actual output of Snopes that suggests its editorial output has been compromised?

nicpottier 7y ago

Threw in $50 as well.

thrower123 7y ago

At this point, this is throwing good money after bad. The damage has been done to their credibility, and it would take drastic action to be a credible arbiter of reality once more.

codezero 7y ago
I don't keep up on things, what has Snopes done to damage their credibility?
- Angostura 7y ago
  Suggested that certain statements from the current president and his cohort may, on occasion, lack credibility, presumably.
  - thrower123 7y ago
    Getting in pissing contests with well-known humor and satire sites was more what I had in mind. It just makes them look petty and small. They aren't as depraved as Politifact, at least.
    - Angostura 7y ago
      Link?