It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionspam and the infowars thread (251 posts)(251 posts)
(251 posts)
Pages:
1
5
9
10
11
12
13
17
This is my favourite topic
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
Depends on the belief actually. Check the site rules.
Assuming one breaks no site rules, one is free to post their beliefs. And others are free to applaud or ridicule said beliefs as well, assuming they don't break the site rules either.
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
USERNAME:JMich#Q&_^Q&Q#GROUP:4#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:161#Q&_^Q&Q#In this case, yes. The article you link doesn't link its sources, it only names them in very vague terms, it also misrepresents the findings (it's not 69% of men that do not have a romantic partner, it's 69% of the singles surveyed, ignoring the 7.5K of married couples surveyed). The links they have are to "rumors" and to itself.

The statement may very well be true, but the site you chose to link makes that a belief that the article is true, not a fact. As they used to say to reporters back in the day, get confirmation from at least two independent sources before believing the item. The linked article by itself is a belief (of you, that they know what they are talking about), but it's not by itself a fact. Not to mention that when I read the title I understood it as "giving up on dating scene and giving up on just marrying friends".

So yes, your article is a belief, not a fact, even if that may be the case for the Japanese people.#Q&_^Q&Q#LINK:161#Q&_^Q&Q#
avatar
I believe that posting a belief is a common occurrence on forums. It is what leads to discussion.

Please do not derail the OP's point though. We are talking specifically about rtcvb.

rtcvb is predisposed to dumping links, huge links in fact and now claims them to be news- at no point does he have anything other to say than the dump itself.

What rtcvb is now actually saying, and in the manner of the most worst case soap box preachers- to anyone that will listen is that he is posting the news that you need to hear and that he believes it to be accurate and there can be no dispute, put a hyper link in there and that's it proven?
Post edited December 10, 2016 by lazydog
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
rtcvb32: Perhaps. I recall watching a video on Japanese and synthetic relationships
Since I don't currently have the time to watch said video (not to mention that the music was a bit annoying for me), does said youtuber properly cite sources, or is he just saying what he thinks and links to more of his videos? And can one verify their claims, or are those left as unconfirmed rumors?
Posted December 10, 2016
low rated
avatar
Someone questions the quality of a Blizzard game? OMG I CAN'T HANDLE IT! DELETE THEIR THREAD!!!
User publicly shares they had a sex-change operation? OMG I CAN'T HANDLE IT! DELETE THEIR THREAD!!!
Anything Donald Trump? OMG I CAN'T HANDLE IT! DELETE THEIR THREAD!!!
Posted December 10, 2016
Oooh I've never actually seen this thread on my frontpage! What is it about?
Posted December 10, 2016
low rated
avatar
lazydog: What rtcvb is now actually saying, and in the manner of the most worst case soap box preachers- to anyone that will listen is that he is posting the news that you need to hear and that he believes it to be accurate and there can be no dispute.
Isn't that how news is? You can't be 100% accurate all the time so those get updated. As long as the news isn't intentionally trying to mislead you (like saying there's WMD's and thus pulling us into a war, or Hands-up don't shoot)

Most of the news I get is from Drudge Report, which of course gets news from all over and collects them together.
avatar
JMich: Since I don't currently have the time to watch said video (not to mention that the music was a bit annoying for me), does said youtuber properly cite sources, or is he just saying what he thinks and links to more of his videos? And can one verify their claims, or are those left as unconfirmed rumors?
Hmmm I can't recall him citing specific sources, It's more he was actually living in Japan for 4 years, as well as providing a window into Japanese culture in a way we westerners probably wouldn't understand.
Post edited December 10, 2016 by rtcvb32
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
rtcvb32: Isn't that how news is?
No. News is not "I just heard X". News is "Someone told me X is true, can I verify that? Go ask your sources and see if you can verify it. If you can get independent confirmation, then it is news, if you cannot get independent confirmation, then it's hearsay and shouldn't be repeated".
Unfortunately, on the age of the internet, no one waits to verify what they hear, and when someone sees something in their feed, they take it as verified.
So please, do not post something you can't verify as news, if you really have to post it, post it as unconfirmed rumor.
avatar
rtcvb32: It's more he was actually living in Japan for 4 years, as well as providing a window into Japanese culture in a way we westerners probably wouldn't understand.
So basically, an outsider's view of Japan. Yes, living 4 years in Japan means you are still an outsider. Being born in Japan from Korean parents also means you are an outsider.
Let me see if I can find the sources for that though.
Edit: Further looking shows that the Nationality Law may have been changed in the last few years. Tell me if you want me to go looking for more info on Japanese naturalization.
Post edited December 10, 2016 by JMich
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
rtcvb32: Most of the news I get is from Drudge Report, which of course gets news from all over and collects them together.
Do they verify them before they post?
Posted December 10, 2016
low rated
avatar
rtcvb32: Isn't that how news is?
avatar
JMich: No. News is not "I just heard X". News is "Someone told me X is true, can I verify that? Go ask your sources and see if you can verify it. If you can get independent confirmation, then it is news, if you cannot get independent confirmation, then it's hearsay and shouldn't be repeated".
I was meaning that the facts are reported as best as they know them, then updated if need be. You're talking more towards ethics of journalism which is more along the lines of professional journalists and how/why they should be trusted to tell the truth. Although those that are found out to be lying tend not to keep jobs long.

But a lot of the big mainstream media seems to do little or no fact-checking at all, and in some cases blatantly lying and making up stories. Although the local stations seem to be actually reporting properly & accurately.

avatar
DaCostaBR: Do they verify them before they post?
Hold on while I call Drudge and find out...
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
rtcvb32: I was meaning that the facts are reported as best as they know them, then updated if need be.
And do you (general you, not specific you) also update your reports once the original article is updated? Or do you keep it at the original version, no matter if the article has changed or not? That is the issue with reposting something as news, that the reposts more often than not do not get updated once the original article is.
Posted December 10, 2016
low rated
avatar
rtcvb32: I was meaning that the facts are reported as best as they know them, then updated if need be.
avatar
JMich: And do you (general you, not specific you) also update your reports once the original article is updated? Or do you keep it at the original version, no matter if the article has changed or not? That is the issue with reposting something as news, that the reposts more often than not do not get updated once the original article is.
Wouldn't you agree that an anonymous individual on a forum should not be held to the same standards as a broadcasting corporation?

If BBC reports that Nessy ate Sasquatch because their reporter overhead some guy saying this in a bar's bathroom, they should research it and provide more sources, because their words carry weight. (Well a bit of weight.)

If Joe Schmoe on GOG forums makes a thread "ZOMG a Scott murdered a Native American!!!!1!!1!!!one" then it's fine, because his words carry no weight at all and nobody in their right mind would use them to make any decisions.
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
rtcvb32: Hold on while I call Drudge and find out...
Don't worry about it, it should be obvious just by reading the article, just like JMich did with the link you posted.
Posted December 10, 2016
low rated
avatar
JMich: And do you (general you, not specific you) also update your reports once the original article is updated? Or do you keep it at the original version, no matter if the article has changed or not? That is the issue with reposting something as news, that the reposts more often than not do not get updated once the original article is.
If notified I made a mistake? Certainly. However I'm not sure 'reposting' applies to me, mostly because I'm not reposting entire articles (thus there's little or nothing to really update), generally the titles and in regards to it's context in the video.

Hmmm my less serious news section could use checks I suppose, since I do quote stuff from the articles... Although if there's anything to update about a guy punching a kangaroo or a beaver going into the dollar store angry at fake trees I wouldn't know :P
avatar
JMich:
Considering there's no way I have the resources to double-triple or confirm the information, I can only hope the journalists did their job.

Although Mainstream media as of late...
Post edited December 10, 2016 by rtcvb32
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
rtcvb32: Considering there's no way I have the resources to double-triple or confirm the information, I can only hope the journalists did their job.
And that's exactly the problem.

If you were to post a single piece of news people could have a conversation, they could verify sources and have a debate, but you don't.

You post 100 links, who cares if it's all bullshit or not? I like what they're saying so I'll post it here, let everyone else sort it out.
Posted December 10, 2016
avatar
rtcvb32: Considering there's no way I have the resources to double-triple or confirm the information, I can only hope the journalists did their job.
avatar
DaCostaBR: And that's exactly the problem.

If you were to post a single piece of news people could have a conversation, they could verify sources and have a debate, but you don't.

You post 100 links, who cares if it's all bullshit or not? I like what they're saying so I'll post it here, let everyone else sort it out.
People still tried to discuss his "news". For a long time people took great pains to explain to him how what he is posting is lies and nonsense. He would always just ignore it, and post another 100 links. He specifically doesn't want a discussion, and he does not want his fake news fact-checked. Let's not pretend it's otherwise.
Pages:
1
5
9
10
11
12
13
17
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionspam and the infowars thread (251 posts)(251 posts)
(251 posts)