I'd have offered you a citation, but repeating what someone else said seems rather silly.
> Since gaining its catchphrase status, "citation needed" has been used in online discussion forums to humorously point out biased or baseless statements made by others.
So what you are saying is that someone thought could be funny by posting a tired meme? That may be true, but still doesn't make sense.
The original post was arguing that there were too many Irish people in Ireland because of the predominant religion. The implication, as I surmise, is that Catholics believe that only those who are constantly reproducing can be real BFFs with Jesus in the afterlife. Also, Catholics are seemingly too stupid to realize that Ireland is incapable of supporting more than 5-6 million people (apparently?) and therefore their mortal sex-cult doomed them and they have absolutely nobody to blame but themselves for a million people dying of starvation. The fools!
This is, at best, very fucking stupid. At worst, it is fairly bigoted and more than a little bit offensive. It is in the same category of Victorian pseudo-science that gave us phrenology and eugenics.
"[Citation needed]" was merely meant as a shorter and much more polite way of implying all of the above. I can be much less polite if that's something you're interested in.
> "[Citation needed]" was merely meant as a shorter and much more polite way of implying all of the above.
I'll grant you that it is shorter. But how is leaning on a meme that stopped being funny in 2007 to call attention to your concerns polite? That would be considered asshole behaviour anywhere else. Especially when you consider that if one is not familiar with the meme and ends up taking it at face value it is a request that is impossible to fulfill, backing one into a corner. That is not good faith participation.
If you have concerns that are worth raising with another party, surely it is worth speaking to that other party like a normal human being?
> it is fairly bigoted and more than a little bit offensive.
I'll extrapolate from this that you are really trying to suggest that the other party might be what we oft label a troll. In which case perhaps you can make a case that they are not deserving of normal human treatment, however they are also not deserving of your time, so no reply would be made in that case anyway.
I'd have offered you a citation, but repeating what someone else said seems rather silly.
> Since gaining its catchphrase status, "citation needed" has been used in online discussion forums to humorously point out biased or baseless statements made by others.
So what you are saying is that someone thought could be funny by posting a tired meme? That may be true, but still doesn't make sense.