Cross posted from Discuit

  • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Despite your stance/tone I’ll answer this in good faith and assume you’re genuinely asking even if I think you’re not.

    The best lies/misinformation attempts are couched in 1) truths and/or 2) plausible things that can’t be dismissed as impossible.

    It is plausible [insert any JFK assassination conspiracy]. Should they all be equally weighted? Is each equally plausible? No, yet dozens persist because they’re at all plausible. I say this as someone who says the least plausible scenario was lone gunman who was killed by some rando. I think it was a conspiracy. But it doesn’t mean I treat each conspiracy theory as equally plausible. Unfortunately it’s hard to 100% disprove basically anything, so even the worst ideas remain sticky if people want them to be true.

    • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Thanks ❤️

      In any case, all this is very little proof that the story is a falsehood. Obviously, by default everything you read online falls to the category “this may have happened”, but that’s all we really have.

      • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        The burden of proof squarely lies with OP. You didn’t ask me to prove it’s false. You asked me to explain my previous comment.

        • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Yup, because the burden of proof is on the one who made the claim. But that only allows us to say the text is not necessarily true.

          When you say the op is lying, that’s a new claim, where the burden of proof is on you.

          • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Actually the burden of proof not necessarily always on the one who made the claim. But it is on the person who has the less credible claim.

            I don’t need to prove it’s false. I just need to demonstrate that, taken at face value, the more prudent thing to do is assume this post is at least partially made up. And given the details of it, the most likely scenario is that the story is not 100% true.

            • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 day ago

              …although, because selling a house ASAP if you have a loan with large payments for it, is the only logical course of action if long-term unemployment is assumed, nothing to that extent has been demonstrated.

                  • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    20 hours ago

                    ok…so why do I need to repeat myself…? You’re literally advocating against the thing you’re asking me to do.

                    Let’s also cut the bullshit and not pretend like you already knew that. You came up with this as a clever quip after you realized I’ve already talked about it. Can we please stop it with the childish games? Make your point or fuck off.