<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Snopes.com &#8211; Liberally alligned all proved with a single email &#8211; I think not.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/</link>
	<description>MY WORKS FOR ALL TO SEE</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:04:40 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jason Archer</title>
		<link>http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/comment-page-1/#comment-35</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Archer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:56:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/#comment-35</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Vern - Great stuff. I too have found this to be the best way to handle the fwd&#039;s. I actually received this email from someone that commonly sends me the fwd&#039;s without fact checking. I thought it was funny because essentially they were trying to tell me that all the snopes links I had sent back to their  emails were wrong. So I posted this on my blog ;o)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><strong>Vern &#8211; Great stuff. I too have found this to be the best way to handle the fwd&#8217;s. I actually received this email from someone that commonly sends me the fwd&#8217;s without fact checking. I thought it was funny because essentially they were trying to tell me that all the snopes links I had sent back to their  emails were wrong. So I posted this on my blog ;o)</strong></p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vern</title>
		<link>http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/comment-page-1/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Vern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/#comment-34</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your in-depth evaluation of this.  I did check it out when it was sent to me.  FactCheck.com has a good write-up on it.  http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_snopescom_run_by_very_democratic_proprietors.html

I also Make it a firm habit, if at all tempted to forward something, to first look it up, at least in Snopes.  If that seems satisfactory, I will either delete it or forward it, depending on their evaluation.  If I am not satisfied with their research, or they don&#039;t have anything on it, I will either submit it to them for research and delete the email for the time being, or look it up elsewhere until I am reasonably satisfied with it one way or the other.  I also reply to the person who sent it to me and quote, with links, the references I used when I found it to be a hoax.  This gives them a chance to reply to whomever sent it to them and also correct it with those they forwarded it to.  

In some cases, when the data is important and is partially correct, I will correct the falsehoods (sometimes with notes on the corrections) and then forward it.  I at least usually mention that I HAVE edited things that were incorrect.

My viewpoint is that one is either part of the solution or part of the problem.  The way to be part of the solution to email garbage is not pass it on unless you can verify the data enough to be reasonably sure it is correct.  And this means going beyond the person who sent it to you, as it is sadly often the case that they simply &quot;rubber-stamped&quot; the thing and sent it on with no checking or questioning.  In actual fact, I can say with solid experience that over 99% of the stories like this sent to me were hoaxes, often passed from one person to the other in a well-meaning effort to help.  This fact is relied on by those who make up the stories as they evidently realize that few, if any, will actually check it out first.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your in-depth evaluation of this.  I did check it out when it was sent to me.  FactCheck.com has a good write-up on it.  <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_snopescom_run_by_very_democratic_proprietors.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_snopescom_run_by_very_democratic_proprietors.html</a></p>
<p>I also Make it a firm habit, if at all tempted to forward something, to first look it up, at least in Snopes.  If that seems satisfactory, I will either delete it or forward it, depending on their evaluation.  If I am not satisfied with their research, or they don&#8217;t have anything on it, I will either submit it to them for research and delete the email for the time being, or look it up elsewhere until I am reasonably satisfied with it one way or the other.  I also reply to the person who sent it to me and quote, with links, the references I used when I found it to be a hoax.  This gives them a chance to reply to whomever sent it to them and also correct it with those they forwarded it to.  </p>
<p>In some cases, when the data is important and is partially correct, I will correct the falsehoods (sometimes with notes on the corrections) and then forward it.  I at least usually mention that I HAVE edited things that were incorrect.</p>
<p>My viewpoint is that one is either part of the solution or part of the problem.  The way to be part of the solution to email garbage is not pass it on unless you can verify the data enough to be reasonably sure it is correct.  And this means going beyond the person who sent it to you, as it is sadly often the case that they simply &#8220;rubber-stamped&#8221; the thing and sent it on with no checking or questioning.  In actual fact, I can say with solid experience that over 99% of the stories like this sent to me were hoaxes, often passed from one person to the other in a well-meaning effort to help.  This fact is relied on by those who make up the stories as they evidently realize that few, if any, will actually check it out first.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Archer</title>
		<link>http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/comment-page-1/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Archer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 01:00:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/#comment-36</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;strong&gt;John - Thanks for the positive comment and every little bit helps to educate those that just throw things out there. Honestly you probably have saved me a junk email somewhere down the road ;o)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><strong>John &#8211; Thanks for the positive comment and every little bit helps to educate those that just throw things out there. Honestly you probably have saved me a junk email somewhere down the road ;o)</strong></p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Sauer</title>
		<link>http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/comment-page-1/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>John Sauer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archerworks.com/2009/news/snopescom-liberally-alligned-all-proved-with-a-single-email-i-think-not/#comment-33</guid>
		<description>Thank you for this post regarding the SNOPES email. I read the entire article and am referring my email buddy to this, particularly the last two paragraphs. 
John</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for this post regarding the SNOPES email. I read the entire article and am referring my email buddy to this, particularly the last two paragraphs.<br />
John</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
