Should there be an important addition to the Forum rules?

[G_Spot_Tornado]

That results in warnings and possible bannings every much as direct insults and slurs.

The new rule being:


********* No posting "news" items form the worldnetdaily website ********

Violation of this rule shall result in warning, repeated violation may result in banning from CF.

***********************************************************


There must be several threads on the front page right now with an OP directly using a worldnetdaily link. Apart from the obvious use of such a link as a parody what the heck is the point.

Has anyone ever seen a factual piece of reporting from them?
Has anyone ever seen an item on there that was not a complete, simplistic distortion of whatever facts they may include in an otherwise work of fiction?

 

[BlessedMan]

This is such a joke...to pick out ONE site and ban it is ridiculous! It's amazing to me how many Bush-hating sites have been posted on here that tend to exagerate things as well. Hopefully people will use their God given brains to decide what's fact or fiction.

Isn't this a Christian Forum? Should atheists and agnostics be banned as well? Of course not! We need everyone's opinion even if you don't agree with it.

<besides, I need you all here to eventually make you agree with MY way of thinking>

 

[G_Spot_Tornado]

Spot the man with no sense of humour. The OP was somewhat (though not entirely) in jest.

No wonder we Christians are the butt of so many comments about lacking humour!

On a more serious note though, I think even most arch-conservatives and fundamentalists might agree that worldnetdaily is a waste of important internet bandwidth.

 

[Ampmonster]

$10billion a year in porn a bigger waste.

 

[G_Spot_Tornado]

$10billion a year in porn a bigger waste.

Maybe not. People seem to really want porn based upon statistics. And bandwidth is important for all those video downloads.

 

[Bobmala]

besides, I need you all here to eventually make you agree with MY way of thinking

haha isn't that what we ALL do?

 

[Ampmonster]

Maybe not. People seem to really want porn based upon statistics. And bandwidth is important for all those video downloads.

the fact that people want it doesnt mean it's not a waste. porn serves not one constuctive purpose.

 

[G_Spot_Tornado]

I have known several "actresses/strippers" who would disagree with you on that score. It does pay the bills, rather well from my personal knowledge of these "ladies".

 

[crystalpc]

As long as we ban the liberal media too I will go for that. First to be banned would be CNN, then ABC, and on from there.

 

[Ampmonster]

i guess drugs are ok to because it keep the 24 inch wheel industry rolling.

"porn serves not one constuctive purpose." i'll add, for the consumer.

 

[crystalpc]

Spot the man with no sense of humour. The OP was somewhat (though not entirely) in jest.

No wonder we Christians are the butt of so many comments about lacking humour!

On a more serious note though, I think even most arch-conservatives and fundamentalists might agree that worldnetdaily is a waste of important internet bandwidth.

I don't agree with that, it is conservative just as all the rest of the news is liberal biased, this way you can get both sides of the same story, and land somewhere in between.
I will not watch CNN, or ABC. I do watch CBS and Fox. Fox being a little more conservative, and closer to my own views. I don't need Peter Jennings trying to influence me to do anything...I oppose his views with ever core of my being. But that is me. I don't even know who the anchors are on CNN, because I turned that **** off my set before the first gulf war..

 

[Paula]

. . . Has anyone ever seen a factual piece of reporting from them?

Yes. In the past, I have been able to cross-reference and verify some of the stories and quoted statements (using sources both foreign and domestic), which have been reported by WND and other internet news magazines as well. WND sometimes also runs exclusive interviews which can be easily verified, if you have the inclination.

 

[G_Spot_Tornado]

I was using hyperbole somewhat but the difference between the mainstream media and worldnetdaily (which I sometimes suspect of being a parody a la LandoverBaptist) is that many reports on worldnet crop up as urban legends several weeks later.

i.e. they are made up reports

Most reports on CNN, ABC, CBS etc at least are based upon real events - you may disagree with the editorialising but the event itself occurred. This is a bs litmus test that worldnetdaily frequently does not pass.

 

[Paula]

I was using hyperbole somewhat but the difference between the mainstream media and worldnetdaily (which I sometimes suspect of being a parody a la LandoverBaptist) is that many reports on worldnet crop up as urban legends several weeks later.

i.e. they are made up reports

Would you give us an example?

 

[tulc]

<besides, I need you all here to eventually make you agree with MY way of thinking>

I agree.
tulcdoh: oh no! it's already started! )

 

[G_Spot_Tornado]

Would you give us an example?

ROTFLMAO!

You are really serious thinking worldnetdaily is a legitimate news source.

Why not in your Google search box enter "worldnetdaily" and "urban legends".

Look at all the hits you get, especially from snopes.com where they list the worldnetdaily examples of "stories" they ran with and it turned out to be fake material or they picked up "stories" that were planted as fake because smart folks know what a bunch of illiterate fools run worldnetdaily.

Lifting the Onion parody about Harry Potter and treating it as real news. LOL LOL - What a bunch of blinded by their zealotry morons - have they ever heard of fact checking. I'm sure The Onion just loves this - it reinforces there opinion that groups like worldnet are a bunch of ignorant fundies who deserve to be picked on.

There are many other examples if you troll the search hits.

Good hunting and sorry for the bubble burst.

 

[crystalpc]

I agree.
tulcdoh: oh no! it's already started! )

lol...

 

[jameseb]

ROTFLMAO!

You are really serious thinking worldnetdaily is a legitimate news source.

Why not in your Google search box enter "worldnetdaily" and "urban legends".

Look at all the hits you get, especially from snopes.com where they list the worldnetdaily examples of "stories" they ran with and it turned out to be fake material or they picked up "stories" that were planted as fake because smart folks know what a bunch of illiterate fools run worldnetdaily.

Lifting the Onion parody about Harry Potter and treating it as new. LOL LOL - What a bunch of blinded by their zealotry morons - have they ever heard of fact checking.

There are many other examples if you troll the search hits.

Good hunting and sorry for the bubble burst.

I'll give ya ***-for-tat....


New York Times. Liberal news source. Known for fabricating stories too.


How do ya like them apples?



*bows*

Thank you, thank you.... autopgraphs will be signed later.



Sincerely,

"Laying down the BOOM" Jameseb

 

[crystalpc]

I'll give ya ***-for-tat....


New York Times. Liberal news source. Known for fabricating stories too.


How do ya like them apples?



*bows*

Thank you, thank you.... autopgraphs will be signed later.

We can also add the Washington Post a few years back..remember??

 

[jameseb]

We can also add the Washington Post a few years back..remember??

Ah yes..... indeed.... Okay, so I don't really remember, lol! Refresh my memory?