My only issue with deleting posted articles is doing a blanket delete by some kind of preconceived notion that some source is good vs. bad. Yes there is stuff way off the end that is a basher site related to cytodyn or spam or comes from a politcal perspective, blah blah blah. But we all need to realize that the NYT, WaPo, etc are coming from a political perspective as well. It just happens to match some peoples ideology and sometimes we dont see our own bias (me included).
But there have been way too many things that were "misinformation" or from sites deemed "disreputable" by some people that have turned out to be 100% true. Meanwhile items from the "reputable" sources that we were told were FACTS turned out to be lies and untrue and just get memory holed or even worse people continue to tell us are FACTS when they are clearly not. There are things that have been repeated ad nauseum the past 6 years that i have been told are facts, but they have never once provided any evidence that it is true. The only facts are that politicians (on both sides) have told me that something exists and it is terrible, but not one single piece of evidence or fact has been presented other than someone telling me "trust me its true". I would say that this has dramatically increased in the past 10 years.
If i was a mod and deleted everything from NYT, WaPo, etc and called it disreputable (because in my perspective they have repeatedly tilted their coverage and lied about things) people would rightly lose their minds that i was deleting factual information. I think that if information is exposed to
What we cant do is blind others to this same system in our fight for cytodyn. I read the article that was posted and it was extremely factual. It didnt do the slight of hand tricks like "experts say", or "government officials say..." It quoted studies and made commentary, just like is done here at IH. People post all kinds of stuff, like "saw this over on YMB..." and we all read and evaluate it. We can read and make up our own mind if it is true or fishy. But what we dont do is blanket delete many posts like that and call YMB a "disreputable" source. We all see its from YMB and know that going in. If someone posts something and says its from the NYT, personally I read it assuming its written by a democratic staffer with a byline. If i read something off of newsmax similar i assume its written by someone with a right leaning take. I read between the lines on all of them and discern what the truth and angle is on them.
(posted by the neighbor of George Orwell's great nephew twice removed)
But there have been way too many things that were "misinformation" or from sites deemed "disreputable" by some people that have turned out to be 100% true. Meanwhile items from the "reputable" sources that we were told were FACTS turned out to be lies and untrue and just get memory holed or even worse people continue to tell us are FACTS when they are clearly not. There are things that have been repeated ad nauseum the past 6 years that i have been told are facts, but they have never once provided any evidence that it is true. The only facts are that politicians (on both sides) have told me that something exists and it is terrible, but not one single piece of evidence or fact has been presented other than someone telling me "trust me its true". I would say that this has dramatically increased in the past 10 years.
If i was a mod and deleted everything from NYT, WaPo, etc and called it disreputable (because in my perspective they have repeatedly tilted their coverage and lied about things) people would rightly lose their minds that i was deleting factual information. I think that if information is exposed to
What we cant do is blind others to this same system in our fight for cytodyn. I read the article that was posted and it was extremely factual. It didnt do the slight of hand tricks like "experts say", or "government officials say..." It quoted studies and made commentary, just like is done here at IH. People post all kinds of stuff, like "saw this over on YMB..." and we all read and evaluate it. We can read and make up our own mind if it is true or fishy. But what we dont do is blanket delete many posts like that and call YMB a "disreputable" source. We all see its from YMB and know that going in. If someone posts something and says its from the NYT, personally I read it assuming its written by a democratic staffer with a byline. If i read something off of newsmax similar i assume its written by someone with a right leaning take. I read between the lines on all of them and discern what the truth and angle is on them.
(posted by the neighbor of George Orwell's great nephew twice removed)
20
