thesultanofsheight Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Now that these three government shills have posted misleading information, let's return to the actual point: Accusing someone of being a Government agent is a bit laughable really as surely that tactic could just as easily be used by a Government agent to discredit someone else. Just my point of view... Which is almost certainly the case in this instance. Too much accusing of others and too much derailment, inflammatory thread starting and accusations of bullying etc. All designed to put everyone else in the frame for everything to deflect attention away from what's really been quite a long campaign to devalue anything on here and draw attention to some of the main protagonists of what used to be sensible debate on MF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Gosh, that Italian family at the next table sure are quiet. Cold Omerta on the menu...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 Now that these three government shills have posted misleading information, let's return to the actual point: government persons are going onto internet sites and posting misinformation. That doesn't mean internet sites are unreliable. It means we need to keep in mind that people commenting on sites like this may be government trolls posting misinformation. That by obvious logic means they're posting misinformation because other people are posting reliable information which they are trying to counter. Are you sure about that? If we consider that most people posting on the internet are, to all intents and purposes, anonymous then how can you verify a source and the accuracy of the information they post? There is a poll on here about anonymity of posters on manxforums which kind of highlights this point. Particularly the example given by one user of their name and photograph being used by another person. If we take Stu_Peters as an example, how do we know that this is the real Stu Peters posting? Well if we know him we can ask and given that he is pretty well known that is not to difficult to verify. If, however, I was to post under the name of John Kennaugh and said I worked in the customer support department for a bank how would you verify that? Accusing someone of being a Government agent is a bit laughable really as surely that tactic could just as easily be used by a Government agent to discredit someone else. Just my point of view... Mamxman, I wasn't referring to online discussion forums. On the internet you can find Encyclopedia Britannica, JSTOR, medical journals, professional news outlets, etc. Any claims on a discussion forum would need to be backed up before being assumed as right. Quoting Yahoo Answers is not what I had in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Now that these three government shills have posted misleading information, let's return to the actual point: government persons are going onto internet sites and posting misinformation. . Mamxman, I wasn't referring to online discussion forums. On the internet you can find Encyclopedia Britannica, JSTOR, medical journals, professional news outlets, etc. Any claims on a discussion forum would need to be backed up before being assumed as right. Quoting Yahoo Answers is not what I had in mind. In your first post (quoted above) you state "government persons are going onto internet sites and posting misinformation". Now correct me if I am wrong but the Encyclopedia Britannica, JSTOR, medical journals, professional news outlets etc which are accessed through the internet are by definition "internet sites". Therefore, using your own statements, how can you trust anything that is published online? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.