Why say something about it if you are uninformed? Don’t go into discussions or post about things you don’t have a good grasp on, this should be obvious.
People who are uninformed don’t know they’re uninformed, and until you’re given such information that shows you don’t have all the facts, why would you assume you don’t have a good grasp?
Listen, I don’t want to resort to the type of condescending interaction that is so common on the internet - perhaps you don’t realize the implications of what you wrote, or even what you wrote. If, however, you are sincerely arguing for some fucked up form of expertise by default, please let me know and I’ll be happy to oblige.
Why say something about it if you are uninformed? Don’t go into discussions or post about things you don’t have a good grasp on, this should be obvious.
People who are uninformed don’t know they’re uninformed, and until you’re given such information that shows you don’t have all the facts, why would you assume you don’t have a good grasp?
wtf, are you being serious right now? Why do you assume you do?
Ironic.
Listen, I don’t want to resort to the type of condescending interaction that is so common on the internet - perhaps you don’t realize the implications of what you wrote, or even what you wrote. If, however, you are sincerely arguing for some fucked up form of expertise by default, please let me know and I’ll be happy to oblige.
Oh. I guess I might’ve done it anyway.
You’re literally quoting Wikipedia as if it’s an authority when it doesn’t even qualify as a secondary source.
I’m not trying to undermine Wikipedias place on the internet, but they are far from an authority on any of the subject matter posted on the site.
So I picked a source I found concise. That’s not a crime or proof that the information within is wrong.