Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,795
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 110:
Line 110: + + + + + + + +
not how the term is used
::::I had hoped that I could debate with and learn from people here. You can imagine my disappointment. But I can't imagine yours. To have to win arguments by force rather than intellect... how sad. Anyways, you win this round. So much for collaboration.-[[User:PhoenixWright|PhoenixWright]] 16:45, 5 March 2008 (EST)
::::I had hoped that I could debate with and learn from people here. You can imagine my disappointment. But I can't imagine yours. To have to win arguments by force rather than intellect... how sad. Anyways, you win this round. So much for collaboration.-[[User:PhoenixWright|PhoenixWright]] 16:45, 5 March 2008 (EST)
:::::The sad part here is you insist on picking fights. Last warning. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 23:36, 5 March 2008 (EST)
:::::The sad part here is you insist on picking fights. Last warning. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 23:36, 5 March 2008 (EST)
== Not How the Term is Used ==
The new definition inserted here is not how the term is used, and is not a concise, clear explanation. The prior definition clearly and succinctly explained what this term is:
:Quote mining is a pejorative term, not recognized by dictionaries, which expresses objection to using someone's quotes against him. While the entire fields of law and politics encourage quoting an adversary to discredit him, evolutionist do not feel their quotes should be used against them and have invented the term quote mining to criticize that practice.
The content page should be reverted to this definition unless there good reasons can be provided not to.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:51, 25 August 2008 (EDT)