
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CoffeeChick.com &#187; yahoo answers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.coffeechick.com/main/tags/yahoo-answers/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.coffeechick.com/main</link>
	<description>A Blog Without A Tagline.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:48:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>More yahoo answers stupidity.</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeechick.com/main/2008/04/more-yahoo-answers-stupidity</link>
		<comments>http://www.coffeechick.com/main/2008/04/more-yahoo-answers-stupidity#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Hunter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Yahoo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yahoo answers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeechick.com/main/?p=739</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This doesn't quite make up for skipping both spam and pedoday, but I don't care.  I've been waiting to see this exact example of stupidity ever since I first saw this image.
Franklin H asked -- "Congrefs of the United States"? Were the founding fathers illiterate? [2 Weeks Ago]
Actually, I've been waiting for someone to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This doesn't quite make up for skipping both spam and pedoday, but I don't care.  I've been waiting to see this exact example of stupidity ever since I first saw <a href="http://archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_zoom_1.html">this image</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>Franklin H asked -- "Congrefs of the United States"? Were the founding fathers illiterate? [<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080330103747AAgBYPO">2 Weeks Ago</a>]</p></blockquote>
<p>Actually, I've been waiting for someone to make the argument that the 'founding fathers' were 'too stupid to take seriously', possibly with that being why the 'bill of rights' is 'dumb' or 'pointless' or should otherwise be ignored.  Because they couldn't possibly know what they were doing if they spelled it 'Congrefs'.</p>
<p>Naturally, some of the answers are equally stupid.  Something named 'Taliban master' said, 'George washington was and so was john adams.'  I guess he must've been called 'Republicans suck' before, because that's how he's being replied to.  And, of course, the longer posts are in response to him and not the questioner.  </p>
<p>The one marked best by the asker: </p>
<blockquote><p>'No but Webster was.'</p></blockquote>
<p>The one that probably should've been best was the one that mentioned that penmanship was different at the time.  </p>
<p>There's this one, which doesn't seem to have any context:</p>
<blockquote><p>'No. Old English is no longer used today as it was in the late 1700s. Try a language history course. </p>
<p>I cringe when I guess your thoughts on Homer and Shakespeare.'</p></blockquote>
<p>What's Homer got to do with this?  </p>
<p>I wonder if this is a typo:</p>
<blockquote><p>No, the style of writing was different then. Those letters that look like f's are elongated s's. That is why the word congress looks like congreff</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvsIsU4GbHVN0Q4hHbGjAoTZ7BR.;_ylv=3?qid=20080415160014AAHBR65">This question</a> also caught my attention:</p>
<blockquote><p>If marijuana is such a bad drug, then why are there so many intelligent people who smoke a joint?</p></blockquote>
<p>I'm fairly certain this question actually reads more like a series of strange noises intended to get trolls to come in for their daily feeding.  </p>
<p>Based on the little not-quite-timestamps, it worked.  The original question was posted '13 minutes ago', and the replies start at '6 minutes ago'.</p>
<blockquote><p>You are clearly mistaken.</p>
<p>Smart people do not smoke marijuana.</p>
<p>From my own observations, people who smoke marijuana are stupid.</p>
<p>It is possible that they might have been smart before they started smoking marijuana.</p>
<p>In fact I would be willing to bet that smoking marijuana reduces your IQ score.</p>
<p>I would like to see a study that investigates the effect of smoking marijuana on your IQ score.</p>
<p>I would be willing to bet that the result will show a dramatic reduction in the IQ of people as a result of their smoking marijuana.<br />
Ethel C<br />
6 minutes ago</p></blockquote>
<p>...which means, I think, "I would like to see a study that agrees with me, and only a study that agrees with me.  Any study that does not agree with me is fake, and obviously done by stupid, stupid potheads."</p>
<blockquote><p>They arent smart, they just think they are... Thats why they are high.<br />
HP<br />
4 minutes ago</p></blockquote>
<p>Not that smart would be better than being high.  Oh no.  Smart is also bad.  Smart means you can't be popular.  So don't be smart either.</p>
<blockquote><p>There are no truly intelligent people that smoke marijuana. Because people who really are smart know that it causes a lot of health problems and if they get caught with it, they are going to jail.<br />
Andrew<br />
4 minutes ago</p></blockquote>
<p>Because intelligence is measured by your ability to assess risk.  No, wait, maybe that's insurability.  Same letters, though, so it counts.</p>
<p>There was also a somewhat intelligent answer in there, but I chose to skip it. </p>
<p>If anything new shows up after I post this, feel free to comment about it.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coffeechick.com/main/2008/04/more-yahoo-answers-stupidity/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I think it&#039;s time for a change....</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeechick.com/main/2008/02/i-think-its-time-for-a-change</link>
		<comments>http://www.coffeechick.com/main/2008/02/i-think-its-time-for-a-change#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 02:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Hunter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[people are stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yahoo answers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeechick.com/main/2008/02/i-think-its-time-for-a-change</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I'm...expanding the Yahoo category in the Idiot Archive, from Yahoo IM to just 'Yahoo'.  Why?
This is why.
Do you think Lesbians are Gay?
I think a lot you don't understand. Lesbians are not Gay. They are Homosexual yes, but they are not Gay. Get it, got it, good!!!
7 minutes ago - 3 days left to answer.
Additional [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I'm...expanding the Yahoo category in the Idiot Archive, from Yahoo IM to just 'Yahoo'.  Why?</p>
<p><a HREF="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AnqLaErMlt8snWIL1I7DQcTd7BR.;_ylv=3?qid=20080221181328AAIp2KO">This is why.</a></p>
<blockquote><p>Do you think Lesbians are Gay?<br />
I think a lot you don't understand. Lesbians are not Gay. They are Homosexual yes, but they are not Gay. Get it, got it, good!!!<br />
7 minutes ago - 3 days left to answer.<br />
Additional Details</p>
<p>41 seconds ago<br />
Chicky ~ Ask them what LGBT stands for.</p></blockquote>
<p>The question was from a user called 'GeOrGiA PeAcH HoOdLuM'.</p>
<p>I think it deserves a place in the Idiot Archive, and, since Yahoo Answers is a part of Yahoo, the Yahoo category is probably where it belongs.</p>
<p>People are stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coffeechick.com/main/2008/02/i-think-its-time-for-a-change/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
