Damn dude, do you gotta be a removed on the internet for no reason or is it fun? They’ve been saying that same “you’ll get it when you’re older” since I was in school and that’s been a minute. Normally it came from some small minded blowhards, but I’ll give you benefit of the doubt.
Their effort was to find the sources for you that purport their claim. It’s not a big nuanced argument, they presented what they thought, you asked a question about what they meant, they linked you supporting information so you could be aware.
It’s not their job to dissect the sources for you, it’s their job to present their argument and if you didn’t get it then they link you the bits they used. If you still don’t get it, stop engaging with the person who linked sources.
When you were in school, did they teach you how to evaluate sources from multiple forms of media? Because the internet wasn’t as massive as it is today when I was taking those classes, but they still taught how to go through a magazine, website, book, and video sources to identify the bias and reliability of the source.
If the only conversations you’re having a full text and no one is linking to a source when they’re making a claim, you’re having a conversation, not a discussion or debate. It’s why people cite their sources for published pieces, gotta check for plagiarism and you have to identify where you got information you claim is factual, it’s just part of having those kinds of communications.
Look dude, I get it. You seem upset because I don’t see the value in being linked a wall of text on the internet. It’s because I’ve been there, many times, and it overwhelmingly is not worth taking seriously.
Like I said, you’ll understand this when you have more experience. I’m tired of repeating myself, and taking your insults.
Damn dude, do you gotta be a removed on the internet for no reason or is it fun? They’ve been saying that same “you’ll get it when you’re older” since I was in school and that’s been a minute. Normally it came from some small minded blowhards, but I’ll give you benefit of the doubt.
Their effort was to find the sources for you that purport their claim. It’s not a big nuanced argument, they presented what they thought, you asked a question about what they meant, they linked you supporting information so you could be aware.
It’s not their job to dissect the sources for you, it’s their job to present their argument and if you didn’t get it then they link you the bits they used. If you still don’t get it, stop engaging with the person who linked sources.
When you were in school, did they teach you how to evaluate sources from multiple forms of media? Because the internet wasn’t as massive as it is today when I was taking those classes, but they still taught how to go through a magazine, website, book, and video sources to identify the bias and reliability of the source.
If the only conversations you’re having a full text and no one is linking to a source when they’re making a claim, you’re having a conversation, not a discussion or debate. It’s why people cite their sources for published pieces, gotta check for plagiarism and you have to identify where you got information you claim is factual, it’s just part of having those kinds of communications.
Look dude, I get it. You seem upset because I don’t see the value in being linked a wall of text on the internet. It’s because I’ve been there, many times, and it overwhelmingly is not worth taking seriously.
Like I said, you’ll understand this when you have more experience. I’m tired of repeating myself, and taking your insults.
I’m gonna block you now. Goodbye.