On Jun 10, 5:13*pm, Gene wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:12:01 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

And I would hope that everyone knows about snopes own issues. *It
turns out they aren't always correct... we need a snopes site for
snopes.

Well, here's the difference.....

Q: How do I know the information you've (Snopes) presented is
accurate?

A: We don't expect anyone to accept us as the ultimate authority on
any topic. Unlike the plethora of anonymous individuals who create and
send the unsigned, unsourced e-mail messages that are forwarded all
over the Internet, we show our work. The research materials we've used
in the preparation of any particular page are listed in the
bibliography displayed at the bottom of that page so that readers who
wish to verify the validity of our information may check those sources
for themselves.http://www.snopes.com/info/faq.asp

If you have an issue with them.... you *know* (that means *proof,* not
that you *feel* some particular way) they have erred and they have
refused to correct the error, then I'm with you. Otherwise, do
yourself a favor and quit posting "unsigned, unsourced e-mail messages
that are forwarded all over the Internet." In other words, "show your
work."


Unfortunately, what you just wrote means that you are taking them at
face value. There are people that have first hand knowledge of an
issue snopes has "ruled" on, and have tried to correct them, but snope
will not listen, according to them. Their posts are just as
"reliable" as snopes it seems.

Realizing that snopes is just a husband/wife team that started a
website a few years back, and not some team of researchers, should
give you a bit of a pause. If not, then ???.