|
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
That doesn't explain why you have to parrot back what that asshat says verbatim. It also leads people to discredit anything you say from now on. |
yeah, actually it does explain why. What's not to understand? Here it is again: I want to have a discussion about a topic. The particular topic happens to be about something I am in total agreeance with Rush about. He communicates the message better than I do, which I think will make it easier for you guys to understand where I'm coming from. In the past, citing Rush has lead to an instant bias that stops the discussion from happening before it starts. So, I tried using the same words, of which I already agree with, without citing his name and I found that people were more likely to actually read the content and have the discussion instead of saying "Rush is the source? Fuck this." Unfortunately, you're right... people will discredit what I say because of this, even if I believe they should understand where I'm coming from. So, I will cite again and we'll see if it works out or reverts back to past examples. I'll admit, it happens to me too when I see someone source the Huffpo or Kos... right away I have no interest in reading it and I'd be more likely to listen without that inherant bias by seeing those sources
|