English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

8 answers

Hmm. Let me see...

*clicks on another window for a few moments*

...Perhaps it's because Yahoo Answers is more about social networking than providing accurate information.

2007-12-22 12:01:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Merry Christmas!
http://www.californiamall.com/holidaytraditions/

2007-12-22 11:10:39 · answer #2 · answered by Buke 4 · 0 0

Nobody, except Jesus Himself, has a corner on the Truth. On wikipedia, it's basically an anonymous collection of things, but here, you can get a broad spectrum of ideas and opinions. Some give their sources, and/or a reference to what and why they believe.

Besides, isn't it more exciting here than wikipedia?

2007-12-22 11:32:42 · answer #3 · answered by Brother Jonathan 7 · 0 1

i don't trust wikipedia for any answers. anyone can edit that stuff and i know a couple of jerks who edit in incorrect info just for fun. google what you want to and then pick a site strictly about the thing you're looking up. but, if it's not something you can just look up, go ahead and ask.

2007-12-22 10:57:46 · answer #4 · answered by halloweenie 6 · 1 0

1) Wikipedia isn't the most reliable place for information.
2) R & S is good for different opinions.

2007-12-22 10:55:49 · answer #5 · answered by Beletje_vos AM + VT 7 · 1 0

The best R&S questions cannot be answered with anything other than an opinion.

Facts are boring. I want vitriolic opinion, dammit!

2007-12-22 10:58:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It would make 99.99% of the people asking look much less stupid. And frankly it would have come in really handy in your questions about agnostics

2007-12-22 11:01:10 · answer #7 · answered by tuyet n 7 · 0 0

Either that or youtube videos. Apparently some people think those are all gospel, irrefutable, truth.

2007-12-22 10:55:44 · answer #8 · answered by Cheryl E 7 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers