To those that mock you with "Why couldn't you Googles that"?

How many times has an earnest chess member asked a question only to be chided with "just googles that"?

We are supposed to be a community.  I myself never look anything up on the internet or do any research on-line.  If I have a question, I have no inhibitions against simply asking in here.

For the most part, the members here have been polite and happy to answer questions.  On another community website I frequent, geared to the film & entertainment crowd (I am a part time professional actor and actively seeking to increase my experience behind the camera) asking a basic question there usually results in a cacophony of insults and abuse.

That is, however, not the case here.  The internet tends to be unreliable.  If a question asked here garners a sufficient number of responses, a rough "consensus" can be divined.  That "consensus" is usually more of a rough approximation of the truth than what would be provided with the Google.

Do you agree?  Why or why not?

Thank you.

Allows me to explains.

While I agree in principle, there's a tendency to treat weakly researched +  generic questions like "How do I play the French defense" with some amount of disdain but better framed questions like "In the Advance French, when does White typically play the f2-f4-f5 break move idea?" tend to solicit really solid advice.  

Much like the homeless man with a witty + creative card getting more hand-outs than a guy whose card just reads "I'm hungry".

Effort tends to beget effort.

It is like a room full of infinite books and when someone asks a question to someone, an avid web browser might think, open your eyes.

1)  The internet is a room of books, if 90% of the "books" are porn, the ramblings of uninformed college kids trying to act hip, and cat pictures with captions.

2)  Typing search strings into HotBot is closing one's eyes if anything.  It blinds the person to the brotherhood of humanity, and also does a dis-service to his mind.  Often the person skims a couple hyperlinks without even thinking.  He lets the computer do the thinking for him.

Fact: What year did "Gone with the Wind" premiere? Google it.

Opinion: What's a good red wine? Discuss.

I think that if I type "How do I play the French Defence" into Google, it would make a lot of sense to be directed to chess.com.

It would make little sense if chess.com directs you back to google.

I'm pretty sure GWTW was 1939, right?  Furthermore it was one of the first color motion pictures.

To Rooperi, and Shivsky, I was talking about even more general questions than about the French Defense -- such as something like "What are the requirements for becoming a National Master in the USCF?"  

Yeah, well, that's also an answer I'd expect to find on chess.com. Any chess related stuff SHOULD be answered here, IMO.

Even more, instead of refering somebody to (for example) the Fide rules with a link, I'd prefer to copy and paste the relevant rule here. It just makes it easier for everybody.

Not really. I just googled it and found out that they were doing technicolor movies as far back as 1917;)

Hah yeah, I figured you or someone more knowledgeable would refute that.  I should have said one of the first commerically released color motion pictures.  Gone with the Wind (1939) and The Wizard of Oz (1939) are the two oldest color films I know of.

It is actually a sad fact that to find specific stuff in the forums here, you're more likely to find it through Google than through Chess.com's search.

For (silly)example, Through Google I can find out who trysts supported in the 2010 soccer world cup, I really dont know how to find that out with chess..com's search.

Maybe if that got fixed, and we had the ability to  link to specific posts in forums more direction will be 'in-house'

                     They can find the plane if they just use Google Earth.

The earliest one I know of(and loved) is "Nothing Sacred" from 1937. Though I just read about "Becky Sharp" winning an award for best color motion picture in 1935. Another famous film is "The Adventures of Robin Hood" from 1938. Brilliant color in that film:)

That's when I thought Ronaldo played for Spain, so I picked Spain to win

I just looked up "trysts chess.com" on yahoo, and I found this thread:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/i-broke-up-with-trysts?page=1

She googled it.

Ronaldo is the Magnus Carlsen of soccer...or Magnus Carlsen is the "Ronaldo of Chess".  

That's when pdela was insane...wait...what did I just say?!?

But it wasnt "knowledge", it was googled. There is no rational reason for such an anti-google bias that you possess.

When I googled "how do you play the benko gambit" just now, the 7th link on the list was...chess.com http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/the-benko-gambit

Now, this was probably not the most useful link, but it is information and it was there, there is no reason to believe a priori that the answers I get from that would be any better, or worse, than creating a whole new thread, and the same applies to any question you get. Someday. someone may type in "what happens when you googles something" and may very well get lead back to this thread.

Some people might ridicule the idea of asking a question on a forum, but I believe they do have a good point (Albeit slightly ignorant of your view). Using a browser is, in many fields, the most effecient way of getting answers. I myself wouldn't know, but the acting field may just be one of those fields.

Sometimes just googling something isn't always the best option, but there is no doubt of its quality as a legitimate, effective, and efficient resource. (On a side note: I also believe that people who say that wikipedia isn't legitimate are just being extremely ignorant)