3 ms·

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 advic

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?

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?