The question is about the origins of the word "dude."
Here is the posted answer:
If you can find a really old dictionary, it's in there as an infected hair of an elephants butt. I looked it up in grade school because the teacher said it when I called him dude. Late 80's early 90's but it was St. Louis public schools so the dictionary looked like it was old back then.
This answer was flagged by someone for deletion. Now I'm doing reviews. My first inclination was to delete it, but now I'm not sure. Whereas this is a poor answer, I'm not sure it's that poor. Whereas this is clearly someone BSing, I'm not sure that's grounds either.
By the way, I did check a 1979 hardcover edition of Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary and the word dude is not defined as an infected hair of an elephant's butt or anything of the sort. Moreover, another user left a comment about having checked a 1971 volume of the multi-volume Oxford English Dictionary reporting the same, that nothing about an elephant's butt hair is listed as a definition for "dude."
So, is it kosher to click "recommend deletion" for this or not? Are we allowed to recommend deletion for no other reason than the answer quite obviously appearing to be completely made up? Do we suffer sarcasm for the simple fact that we can't prove that the answer is not sincere?