boyfriday Posted August 23, 2010 Author Share Posted August 23, 2010 I'm criticising the 'matter of fact' fashion in which certain posters present pages from wikipedia into a debate believing that this somehow confirms that their argument is right, thereby making the opposing argument wrong. I'm not criticising the use of wikipedia.. I don't believe anyone is. ..but at least they're providing some evidence and a link to its source. Whether we choose to believe it or not is a matter for us, but if we don't we can at least consider the evidence and respond accordingly. The real problem is where posters present opinion as fact without attempting or bothering to corroborate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Despite the initial argument I have never once encountered on here someone claiming their argument/statement was right/true because of the connection with Wiki or Google. I am prepared to be corrected on that though. And if as has been suggested, it would be very easy to correct me considering the 'over use' of Wiki as a truth/proof tool.So are you saying that in all your time on SF, you've never seen anyone respond to a post with: 'I think you'll find you're mistaken' or 'that is simply not true'- accompanied by a wiki link?.. common Alien!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 If the wiki article is in itself well sourced, then I don't see a problem. The important bit being that the article is well sourced, of course. if being the operative word. That's my bugbear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 ..but at least they're providing some evidence and a link to its source. Whether we choose to believe it or not is a matter for us, but if we don't we can at least consider the evidence and respond accordingly. The real problem is where posters present opinion as fact without attempting or bothering to corroborate it. An opinion shouldn't need corroborating.. it's an opinion; everyone is entitled to form their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 So are you saying that in all your time on SF, you've never seen anyone respond to a post with: 'I think you'll find you're mistaken' or 'that is simply not true'- accompanied by a wiki link?.. common Alien!. If it was common I wouldn't have made my previous statement otherwise all it would take was a link. You actually maybe right..but in all honesty I haven't seen one. Maybe I'm just not looking when I post. As it's a common occurrence I'm sure the next 20 posts with connecting links will prove otherwise. On the whole I must admit I prefer most Wiki links...far more interesting than a lot of drivel spouted on here....yes yes, me inc. As an addition...there is a lot of "rubbish" "you talk a load of crap" Meet me behind the bikeshed I'll show you who's right"...as proof of truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 If it was common I wouldn't have made my previous statement otherwise all it would take was a link. You actually maybe right..but in all honesty I haven't seen one. Maybe I'm just not looking when I post. As it's a common occurrence I'm sure the next 20 posts with connecting links will prove otherwise. On the whole I must admit I prefer most Wiki links...far more interesting than a lot of drivel spouted on here....yes yes, me inc. As an addition...there is a lot of "rubbish" "you talk a load of crap" Meet me behind the bikeshed I'll show you who's right"...as proof of truth. I'm a troller not a fighter:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 23, 2010 Author Share Posted August 23, 2010 An opinion shouldn't need corroborating.. it's an opinion; everyone is entitled to form their own. I was referring to opinions presented as fact, rather than someone just expressing an opinion. "My favourite football team is United" as opposed to "United are the best football team". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 I was referring to opinions presented as fact, rather than someone just expressing an opinion. "My favourite football team is United" as opposed to "United are the best football team". Agreed!. That's when agreeing to disagree becomes the best policy, as no amount of links will change their opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted August 23, 2010 Share Posted August 23, 2010 Agreed!. That's when agreeing to disagree becomes the best policy, as no amount of links will change their opinion. What happens when someone posts a fact and someone else challenges it? If proved correct should he/she still agree to disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 23, 2010 Author Share Posted August 23, 2010 Agreed!. That's when agreeing to disagree becomes the best policy, as no amount of links will change their opinion. Well if sporting achievements are rated on results, how could anyone dispute that Chelsea were the best football team in England last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.