http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2015/09/kim-davis-denies-a-marriage-license-to-an-atheist-couple/

That is unreal. In fact, one might go as far as to say it's bananas.

You really think someone would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies?

I still remember this awesome test I took in elementary school. It said:

1. Read all of the following steps first before performing any of them.
2. Draw circles around all of the even numbers.
3. Draw X's through all of the odd numbers.
4. Underline all primes.
(a list of 20 other steps)
25. Do not perform steps 2 through 24. Write your name in the corner and turn this sheet in.



When I looked around the classroom, it was full of people erasing all the marks they'd made.

LOL, I must use this as an aptitude test next time I'm interviewing for software developers...

kim-davis-denies-a-marriage-license-to-an-atheist-couple/

How does she keep her job? Why isn't she fired?

I've heard it as an anecdote many times, never heard of it actually happening.

There were a few times I've had people tell me that same story as though it was them, and I've questioned, "Was that ACTUALLY you doing that? Who was the professor? What was the class? When?" and invariably they back down a bit, "Well, I heard it this one time."

For convenience, I'll assume this "I was in a class" was really 'I heard a story about a class", rather than questioning your unassailable online integrity.

We did it in primary school. Grade 5. Mrs W's class.
Everyone including me was frantically running through the questions (I think a prize was offered to whoever finished first, correctly), while one kid just sat there with the biggest smug grin on his face.

We got it again at some point in high school, but it didn't really work.

You really think someone would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies?

I don't think it's as much about lying as it is about people jumping to conclusions.

How does she keep her job? Why isn't she fired?

You didn't read the article, did you? :p

It's an ever-worsening problem. Sturgeon's Law says that 90% of everything is crap, and most people are aware of that. So when someone posts a big long thing with, like, lots of words their primitive lizard brain kicks in (you know, the part of the brain that decides whether to read a thing or to make fart jokes instead) and they have a filter that tells them that "90% of this thing is probably crap" and so they don't read it. So the author often helpfully includes a TLDR summary at the top, and a click-grabbing sensationalist headline, then hides all of their bullshit, made-up statistics deep in the article body (if you read to here, make a fart joke down below and don't worry about reading the rest of this) where they know that 99% of people aren't ever going to read to and call them on it. All people see is the headline and they either a) nod their head approving, because the statement in the headline agrees with their pre-existing biases (bonus points if the headline is phrased as a question, so they can make their bullshit point with the additional safety line of calling it a question, when someone actually calls them on it), or b) they rage-bash their keyboard in response to the inutterable stupidity of the poster, polishing up 650 words of pure shit in response to an attention-baiting headline that is most likely 100% refuted by actual facts. It all only gets worse as more and more people get access to internet. It's why Google et al need to be opposed, vociferously and loudly, in their attempts to bring ever more and more people onto the internet with their global networks of balloons and bullshit. Hasn't this September gone on long enough?

You didn't read the article, did you?

No. I never leave this site to read articles elsewhere.