Thread: Erroneous Headlines

I know the erroneous headlines are done in fun, and I like to have fun.
But sometimes I want to come here to get accurate information in a hurry while I'm at work.
I hate going to other sites.

Thoughts?
Is there a way to separate fact from fiction for when we are in a hurry?

Does anyone else think this is necessary, or is it just me?

Apply common sense and the principles outlined in the Code Of Conduct.

Doing so would indicate any headlines suggesting that a miscreant was signed by the Vikings was a bogus headline.

e.g.

'Vikings trade for Tank Johnson'
'Vikings trade for Moss'
'Vikings trade for Pacman Jones'
'Vikings trade Hutch back to Seahawks for Burleson'
'Vikings re-sign Brock Lesnar'

or...

'Vikings' Childress welcomes back Terrell Owens as Vikings complete trade with Dallas for 6 future Day One draft picks, reminiscent of the Herschel Walker Deal'

Simple.
If it's Cajun always be leary.

If it's me I post in the correct forum and have it properly referenced.

Neither happen very often and if they are based in fact, like Cajun's were today I don't have a problem with it, some do.
He had a McKinnie one that was true and was in the general nfl section and he had a Moss one that was from a 1998 article.
Personally, I thought it was interesting to read that old headline.

What's the difference between a properly referenced headline and someone posting a completely idiotic post that you click on and read?
Personally, i will take the deceptive headline every time, at least there is typically worth reading when you click on it.

My opinion, you could care less.
But you just wasted 5 secs of your life reading it and it will never be returned.

"Purplexing" wrote:

Apply common sense and the principles outlined in the Code Of Conduct.

Doing so would indicate any headlines suggesting that a miscreant was signed by the Vikings was a bogus headline.

e.g.

'Vikings trade for Tank Johnson'
'Vikings trade for Moss'
'Vikings trade for Pacman Jones'
'Vikings trade Hutch back to Seahawks for Burleson'
'Vikings re-sign Brock Lesnar'

or...

'Vikings' Childress welcomes back Terrell Owens as Vikings complete trade with Dallas for 6 future Day One draft picks, reminiscent of the Herschel Walker Deal'

Purplexing, I am curious as to your eductation and occupation.
I remember you saying you did something with stats, but you seem to be all around intelligent.
I noticed you know the difference between e.g. and i.e.

Man, you guys are just NO FUN!!!

Just like the NFL now stands for the No Fun League!!!

Purplexing, I am curious as to your eductation and occupation.
I remember you saying you did something with stats, but you seem to be all around intelligent.
I noticed you know the difference between e.g. and i.e.
[/quote]


Lets not confuse the masses!
If you are going to bring it up...give examples!
;D

e.g. stands for the Latin "exempli gratia," (that's "for example" to you and me). It is followed by one or more examples. Perhaps a better way to remember this one is to think of these letters standing for "example given." Just keep in mind that using "e.g." does not indicate that the list given is a complete one.
- We'll be happy to have you join us for a Thanksgiving feast, e.g., barbequed turkey, cranberry sauce, wilted Spinach salad.

- The family has lots of groovy activities planned for our post-meal time. E.g., touch football, television viewing, and power napping are always popular activities for a Thanksgiving night at the Smith residence.



i.e. stands for the Latin "id est," which means "that is." It is followed by an explanation. Not sure if you should use "i.e."? Replace it with "in other words" and see if your sentence retains the original meaning. If it does, "i.e." is the abbreviation for you, in that case.

- That great American holiday, i.e., Thanksgiving, is almost upon us.

- Enjoy your roast turkey, green bean casserole, mashed potatoes, and homemade gravy on November 23rd, i.e., Thanksgiving.



With either one, remember to


Use a period after each letter. They are abbreviations.
Either abbreviation can be used to begin a sentence; remember to follow with a comma.
Either abbreviation can be used in a parenthetical statement; again, remember to follow with a comma.
If using within the sentence, and not at the beginning or in parentheses, always precede and follow with a comma.
In a casual setting of course, you can just say "for example" and "that is." After all, throwing around bits and pieces from a dead language in relaxed conversation can sound a tad pretentious ("Oh, in situ, utterances such as i.e. and e.g. have the ability to make the speaker sound like they have a very impressive modus operandi!"). But it couldn't hurt to know the difference between this oft-confused pair, especially if you use examples and rewordings often in your writing.

"SKOL" wrote:

I know the erroneous headlines are done in fun, and I like to have fun.
But sometimes I want to come here to get accurate information in a hurry while I'm at work.
I hate going to other sites.

Thoughts?
Is there a way to separate fact from fiction for when we are in a hurry?

Does anyone else think this is necessary, or is it just me?

Just look at where its posted lol,

if its in the clubhouse or general NFL discussion, its not true (or its true and related to anotehr team :P)


If its posted by Prophet in general nfl, its a similiar name of a vikings player, but a different player/different team

(typically)

If its posted by Cajun, well see Surprise! Moss goes to Vikes

if you are really hurting for just serious stuff, wait till Singer comes back and then just search for all his posts lol, he's the resident news hound

I'm torn.
Like I said, I like to have fun, and most times it's no big deal.
Maybe if I just change my habits, from glancing down the "latest talk" to opening up a forum.


What would be really cool is if there was a new forum, Latest Vikings News, where only actual headlines would be listed (and of course comments from others).
Then if that forum would show up as a different color in Latest Talk we could be confident that the thread is factual, at least as far as the media is factual.
This way I could use PP.O for all factual news and for fun.

If I'm the only one with an issue with this though, leave it as is.
I'm getting that impression.

Also, I wasn't trying to single out cajun.

I say that if you come here just to look at topic titles, you don't deserve to hear the real news.

"Billy" wrote:

"Purplexing" wrote:

Apply common sense and the principles outlined in the Code Of Conduct.

Doing so would indicate any headlines suggesting that a miscreant was signed by the Vikings was a bogus headline.

e.g.

'Vikings trade for Tank Johnson'
'Vikings trade for Moss'
'Vikings trade for Pacman Jones'
'Vikings trade Hutch back to Seahawks for Burleson'
'Vikings re-sign Brock Lesnar'

or...

'Vikings' Childress welcomes back Terrell Owens as Vikings complete trade with Dallas for 6 future Day One draft picks, reminiscent of the Herschel Walker Deal'

Purplexing, I am curious as to your eductation and occupation.
I remember you saying you did something with stats, but you seem to be all around intelligent.
I noticed you know the difference between e.g. and i.e.

I am a professional spell-checker.
:P
Things have been slow around here since MSFT introduced those features in their WP packages several years ago....

Actually, I work in insurance { where is the 'yawn' smilie? } and have a Math degree from UConn.
Any guesses as to my profession ?

Two of my pet peeves are:

1. improper spelling by posters who resort to calling people morons or idiots; i.e. they
can't correctly spell half of the words in their name-calling replies,
and
2. people who quote stats that have little credibility relative to the upcoming event; e.g. the Tampa Bay Bucs lost every game they played in temperatures under 34 degrees at the start of the game.
Fallacy: the TB Bucs lost most of the games in that streak, before it ended a few years back, MAINLY because they were a consistently terrible team.
And very little of their losing streak in sub-34 degree temps was due to ( i.e. correlated to ) the temperature on game day.
More credible stats would consider the relative strengths of the TWO teams which will be playing later that day, not teams from 10 years ago.