cite

That blog post they cite includes this: My advice on JSLint: dont use it.

How would one "cash in on guilt" in a system that is as patently absurd as the one you cite?

I am NOT an Apple fanboy, but in this occasion I would like to cite the iPhone's sales as a good example.

]The confusion point you cite was our biggest concern in building the "Remember me" functionality.

You cite scientific evidence, but you don't provide any sources, which makes it seem unsubstantiated.

It seems very clear how this piece misrepresented you; the entire elided question you cite is particularly damning.

For a person associated with a publication I would expect a much higher level of knowledge of things like 'how to cite' and 'how to attribute' and maybe a dash of copyright 101.

Respectfully, you didn't read the rest of the abstract to the article you cite, and the next few sentences support what the article says:>Other studies looked at speed dispersion and found evidence that this is also an important factor in determining crash rate.

Even the article you cite hints at the fact that the relationship isn't that simple: In figure 1, rural roads with higher speed limits have a shallow linear relationship between crashes and speed, while urban roads with lower speed limits have a much steeper, exponential relationship between crashes and speed.

Almost the entire piece does nothing but cite facts, such as: the dropping of the nuclear bombs does not figure significantly in historical records of the Japanese leadership's discussion about surrender; the Japanese war council decided on August 8 not even to discuss the Hiroshima bombing; damage to Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not out of scale with the earlier fire-bombings of other cities; Japanese leaders had expressed a willingness to sacrifice their cities if necessary; Japan's war strategy was predicated on the Soviets staying neutral; and so on.