• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Poisoning the Well' Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
jonny5 said:
Ideally this would be solved by simply not reading the threads of people who constantly post 'not respectable' source, rather than flaming them. They would eventually change their ways if they wanted views. But, we have rules for a reason.
Click to expand...
Equally, we can ignore the non-constructive or baiting replies. I’m not saying they’re good, just that I don’t think they’re worth the moderators efforts unless they become disruptive by doing the same thing repeatedly.
 
Spartacus FPV said:
"The black helicopters are circling! We HAVE confirmation, I HAVE THE DOCUMENTS RIGHT HERE!"
Click to expand...

We have documents that PROVE that the U.S. Government (in conjunction with the lizard people and Satan himself) is making all of the frogs GAY!
 
Spartacus FPV said:
"The black helicopters are circling! We HAVE confirmation, I HAVE THE DOCUMENTS RIGHT HERE!"
Click to expand...

Trump just confirmed that THE LIBERAL SISSIES are the reason behind the Orlando Massacre. Soros & Evil Clinton have conspired with Boeing & Chem trails to poison the mind of the young and plant the seed of radicalization in our schools !

PROTECT YOURSELF NOW !

Buy XProtect 2000 for 3 easy payments of 59.99$ you get 5 monthly doses of combat vitamins to resist these Chem trails. Buy a year for only 3 easy payments of 89.99$ ! BUY NOW !
 
Cisero said:
Trump just confirmed that THE LIBERAL SISSIES are the reason behind the Orlando Massacre. Soros & Evil Clinton have conspired with Boeing & Chem trails to poison the mind of the young and plant the seed of radicalization in our schools !

PROTECT YOURSELF NOW !

Buy XProtect 2000 for 3 easy payments of 59.99$ you get 5 monthly doses of combat vitamins to resist these Chem trails. Buy a year for only 3 easy payments of 89.99$ ! BUY NOW !
Click to expand...

I just sent my order in, thanks for the heads up!
 
jonny5 said:
Whats the moderators positions on this constant attacking of a OPs choice of source when starting a thread? For example, someone starts thread using Breitbart site as the link where they read it. The very next post is some snarky remark about how Breitbart sucks and the entire thread is bunk. Is this:

-baiting
-derailing
-threadjacking
-offtopic
-being a jerk

?
Click to expand...

Well, when you have reports about Trump from the New York Times or Washington Post, the same old group always bleats "fake news".
 
Redress said:
Questioning the reliability of the source reporting a story is very much a legitimate part of the discussion. It has been going on since as long as there has been political debate. Gotta put your big boy pants on...
Click to expand...

As long as the news source is the topic of the discussion. If the topic is yellow balloons, why not discuss balloons?
 
Cisero said:
Trump just confirmed that THE LIBERAL SISSIES are the reason behind the Orlando Massacre. Soros & Evil Clinton have conspired with Boeing & Chem trails to poison the mind of the young and plant the seed of radicalization in our schools !

PROTECT YOURSELF NOW !

Buy XProtect 2000 for 3 easy payments of 59.99$ you get 5 monthly doses of combat vitamins to resist these Chem trails. Buy a year for only 3 easy payments of 89.99$ ! BUY NOW !
Click to expand...

Case in point. This **** has nothing to do with this thread.
 
jonny5 said:
So you're agreeing with me that it needs to stop?
Click to expand...

Well, NYT or WaPo are actual sources, Gateway Pundit or Infowars are crap conspiracy sites. Big difference.
 
Lovebug said:
As long as the news source is the topic of the discussion. If the topic is yellow balloons, why not discuss balloons?
Click to expand...

If there are a bunch of balloons that I cannot personally see, and some one with a history of lying to me tells me they are yellow, questioning the person's reliability is perfectly legit. To make good judgements and decisions, we need good information, so how reliable information is is a key part of the process.
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Did you hear that Infowars got their White House Press Credentials?
Click to expand...
It's really amazing. The thing with Infowars is that it isn't just a hard right outlet, it is a straight up conspiracy outlet. I wonder if the white house is afraid of losing that audience.
 
jonny5 said:
It literally is
Click to expand...

The key there is irrelevant.

Breitbart and infowars simply don't have credibility as sources. You may as well just link to your own blog where you write whatever you want. Criticizing that wouldn't be poisoning the well, rather, it would be discarding a disreputable source.
 
jonny5 said:
I didnt make the forum rules, Im simply asking for clarification. Rule 3 says

Another form of baiting is known as “derailing” or “thread-jacking”. This is deliberate act of making statements with an aim of diverting the topic of a thread significantly from its main focus. These negative forms of baiting constitute a rules violation that can potentially lead to a suspension of posting privileges.
Click to expand...

Poisoning the well posts would seem to fall exactly in line with this.
Click to expand...
You conveniently neglect to mention posts with "FAKE NEWS!" or "but Obama..." or "but Hillary..." as thread diversion and derailment.
 
Absentglare said:
The key there is irrelevant.

Breitbart and infowars simply don't have credibility as sources. You may as well just link to your own blog where you write whatever you want. Criticizing that wouldn't be poisoning the well, rather, it would be discarding a disreputable source.
Click to expand...

In your opinion. Which is irrelevant to the subject of a debate.
 
jonny5 said:
In your opinion, which is irrelevant to the topic being presented.
Click to expand...

It is very relevant.

So, what is your opinion regarding the sources I gave?

You can't treat all sources equally, otherwise you would have scientific journals carrying the same weight as chemtrail blogs.
 
jonny5 said:
In your opinion. Which is irrelevant to the subject of a debate.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understood my point, whatsoever. It is not merely my opinion, it is how the world works.

Here, let me give you an example:

I claim that President Trump had a secret conversation with me where he confessed to treason.

Now, can i cite that sentence as proof of my claim? After all, i can link to it, repeat it- does that mean it's true? Accurate?

No, it doesn't. Human brains use a soft, iterative decoding. This means that we have limited confidence in our own ideas, and we improve on those ideas with new information.

We have become accustomed to using mainstream media as purveyors of truth. You can thrash and whine about this all you want, but claiming that any imperfection of mainstream sources opens the floodgates for us to all be on equal footing in terms of the authority of our claims is ludicrous. The reason we call them "mainstream media" is that they actually are better about sticking to the truth than the rest of us.

And "mainstream media" isn't a monolith. There are lots of different sources, competing with one another. They don't want to be factually wrong, they want to be right, and they try to keep each other in check.
 
Absentglare said:
I don't think you understood my point, whatsoever. It is not merely my opinion, it is how the world works.

Here, let me give you an example:

I claim that President Trump had a secret conversation with me where he confessed to treason.

Now, can i cite that sentence as proof of my claim? After all, i can link to it, repeat it- does that mean it's true? Accurate?

No, it doesn't. Human brains use a soft, iterative decoding. This means that we have limited confidence in our own ideas, and we improve on those ideas with new information.

We have become accustomed to using mainstream media as purveyors of truth. You can thrash and whine about this all you want, but claiming that any imperfection of mainstream sources opens the floodgates for us to all be on equal footing in terms of the authority of our claims is ludicrous. The reason we call them "mainstream media" is that they actually are better about sticking to the truth than the rest of us.

And "mainstream media" isn't a monolith. There are lots of different sources, competing with one another. They don't want to be factually wrong, they want to be right, and they try to keep each other in check.
Click to expand...

:lamo

We are all on equal footing regarding the authority of our claims.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom