NO U
Lol.
Why are you talking about things no one here does?
What are you talking about?
Not when they have no evidence, they can’t.
Ideas can stand on their own without evidence. And ideas that are supported by evidence are often wrong/worthless. Evidence is easy.
So you have no examples?
You misunderstand. It is you who should have the examples, not me. It is purely your foolish vanity that prevents it. Deludedly believing you are always right is stupid and vain/proud.
Project somewhere
Cool it there freud. I thought you were against the “communists” and their nonsense...
I have no ego.
Then act like it.
I’m worthless. I don’t matter
I disagree.
I am capable of entertaining an idea that I do not personally like
Not without vapid insult and calls to suicide you can’t :(
Holy shit, I agree completely
Excellent. Though your major difficulty is in disagreeing civilly, i’ll consider this a step in the right direction.
Demanding proof/evidence is our website’s immune system
I understand why you think this, but it’s wrong. We can request such proof/evidence, and arbitrate that any refusal to provide such is a reason to discard/ignore/prevent consideration, but making petulant demands is for children.
All claims, including facts which are merely one type of claim, regardless of source are our responsibility to verify thoroughly before accepting. It is the burden of all students. We can ask for help in this, but we can’t demand nor expect it. Furthermore, it is a process and skillset that we refine by doing ourselves.
In a formal debate (a silly game; base pageantry) the burden of proof falls on the claimant. In real life, it falls on us.
How we deal with genuine shills is by demanding proof/evidence of the claims they make
Citation please. Do you see my point? Demanding evidence and citation is a common troll/shill technique - not one that is employed by earnest students.
We can’t just let it slide
Again, i understand the reasoning and logic behind such criteria. If that is your arbitrary line, so be it. The process of validation is subjective, and we all must make such determinations for ourselves. However, there are many reasons a person may reasonably not be forthcoming with evidence, for one - petulant demand. Another is that commonly it is a flimsy rhetorical technique trolls use to waste time. Bothering to actually explain further to a disingenuous party is an even bigger waste of time.
but we cannot simply allow ourselves to accept claims or statements when the faggot who posted them has no evidence for them
In general, i agree. Furthermore we cannot allow ourselves to accept claims/statements/facts merely because they have evidence that supports them. More rigorous validation is required, and - as i said - evidence is easy.
Otherwise we no longer stand for truth and can no longer parse genuine conspiracies from hoaxes (malicious or benevolent).
I avoid the word truth most of the time. Though the pursuit of truth is the ideal, i am generally more than happy to accept/obtain validated fact in lieu of it.
As for parsing genuine conspiracies from hoaxes - that is a much larger discussion.
“No one actually said a thing you claimed.”
I still have no idea what you are talking about. The OP made this post to say that you were a shill, and i responded to it. If i said something that the OP didn’t or others in the thread didn’t that is a good thing because i am adding to the conversation... right? Perhaps you could quote a specific statement that you take issue with, and we could discuss that specifically?
NO U
Lol.
Why are you talking about things no one here does?
What are you talking about?
Not when they have no evidence, they can’t.
Ideas can stand on their own without evidence. And ideas that are supported by evidence are often wrong/worthless. Evidence is easy.
So you have no examples?
You misunderstand. It is you who should have the examples, not me. It is purely your foolish vanity that prevents it. Deludedly believing you are always right is stupid and vain/proud.
Project somewhere
Cool it there freud. I thought you were against the “communists” and their nonsense... This is conpro; pop-psy doesn’t fly here.
I have no ego.
Then act like it.
I’m worthless. I don’t matter
I disagree.
I am capable of entertaining an idea that I do not personally like
Not without vapid insult and calls to suicide you can’t :(
Holy shit, I agree completely
Excellent. Though your major difficulty is in disagreeing civilly, i’ll consider this a step in the right direction.
Demanding proof/evidence is our website’s immune system
I understand why you think this, but it’s wrong. We can request such proof/evidence, and arbitrate that any refusal to provide such is a reason to discard/ignore/prevent consideration, but making petulant demands is for children.
All claims, including facts which are merely one type of claim, regardless of source are our responsibility to verify thoroughly before accepting. It is the burden of all students. We can ask for help in this, but we can’t demand nor expect it. Furthermore, it is a process and skillset that we refine by doing ourselves.
In a formal debate (a silly game; base pageantry) the burden of proof falls on the claimant. In real life, it falls on us.
How we deal with genuine shills is by demanding proof/evidence of the claims they make
Citation please. Do you see my point? Demanding evidence and citation is a common troll/shill technique - not one that is employed by earnest students.
We can’t just let it slide
Again, i understand the reasoning and logic behind such criteria. If that is your arbitrary line, so be it. The process of validation is subjective, and we all must make such determinations for ourselves. However, there are many reasons a person may reasonably not be forthcoming with evidence, for one - petulant demand. Another is that commonly it is a flimsy rhetorical technique trolls use to waste time. Bothering to actually explain further to a disingenuous party is an even bigger waste of time.
but we cannot simply allow ourselves to accept claims or statements when the faggot who posted them has no evidence for them
In general, i agree. Furthermore we cannot allow ourselves to accept claims/statements/facts merely because they have evidence that supports them. More rigorous validation is required, and - as i said - evidence is easy.
Otherwise we no longer stand for truth and can no longer parse genuine conspiracies from hoaxes (malicious or benevolent).
I avoid the word truth most of the time. Though the pursuit of truth is the ideal, i am generally more than happy to accept/obtain validated fact in lieu of it.
As for parsing genuine conspiracies from hoaxes - that is a much larger discussion.
“No one actually said a thing you claimed.”
I still have no idea what you are talking about. The OP made this post to say that you were a shill, and i responded to it. If i said something that the OP didn’t or others in the thread didn’t that is a good thing because i am adding to the conversation... right? Perhaps you could quote a specific statement that you take issue with, and we could discuss that specifically?
NO U
Lol.
Why are you talking about things no one here does?
What are you talking about?
Not when they have no evidence, they can’t.
Ideas can stand on their own without evidence. And ideas that are supported by evidence are often wrong/worthless. Evidence is easy.
So you have no examples?
You misunderstand. It is you who should have the examples, not me. It is purely your foolish vanity that prevents it. Deludedly believing you are always right is stupid and proud.
Project somewhere
Cool it there freud. I thought you were against the “communists” and their nonsense... This is conpro; pop-psy doesn’t fly here.
I have no ego.
Then act like it.
I’m worthless. I don’t matter
I disagree.
I am capable of entertaining an idea that I do not personally like
Not without vapid insult and calls to suicide you can’t :(
Holy shit, I agree completely
Excellent. Though your major difficulty is in disagreeing civilly, i’ll consider this a step in the right direction.
Demanding proof/evidence is our website’s immune system
I understand why you think this, but it’s wrong. We can request such proof/evidence, and arbitrate that any refusal to provide such is a reason to discard/ignore/prevent consideration, but making petulant demands is for children.
All claims, including facts which are merely one type of claim, regardless of source are our responsibility to verify thoroughly before accepting. It is the burden of all students. We can ask for help in this, but we can’t demand nor expect it. Furthermore, it is a process and skillset that we refine by doing ourselves.
In a formal debate (a silly game; base pageantry) the burden of proof falls on the claimant. In real life, it falls on us.
How we deal with genuine shills is by demanding proof/evidence of the claims they make
Citation please. Do you see my point? Demanding evidence and citation is a common troll/shill technique - not one that is employed by earnest students.
We can’t just let it slide
Again, i understand the reasoning and logic behind such criteria. If that is your arbitrary line, so be it. The process of validation is subjective, and we all must make such determinations for ourselves. However, there are many reasons a person may reasonably not be forthcoming with evidence, for one - petulant demand. Another is that commonly it is a flimsy rhetorical technique trolls use to waste time. Bothering to actually explain further to a disingenuous party is an even bigger waste of time.
but we cannot simply allow ourselves to accept claims or statements when the faggot who posted them has no evidence for them
In general, i agree. Furthermore we cannot allow ourselves to accept claims/statements/facts merely because they have evidence that supports them. More rigorous validation is required, and - as i said - evidence is easy.
Otherwise we no longer stand for truth and can no longer parse genuine conspiracies from hoaxes (malicious or benevolent).
I avoid the word truth most of the time. Though the pursuit of truth is the ideal, i am generally more than happy to accept/obtain validated fact in lieu of it.
As for parsing genuine conspiracies from hoaxes - that is a much larger discussion.
“No one actually said a thing you claimed.”
I still have no idea what you are talking about. The OP made this post to say that you were a shill, and i responded to it. If i said something that the OP didn’t or others in the thread didn’t that is a good thing because i am adding to the conversation... right? Perhaps you could quote a specific statement that you take issue with, and we could discuss that specifically?