Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by tonmoy on Monday July 20, 2020 @10:35AM
(#23898239)
I claim there is a tea pot in orbit around the sun. I can’t sustain my claims by bringing a link, you need to provide reference to prove that I am wrong.
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by cblackthornekc on Monday July 20, 2020 @10:40AM
(#23898283)
I mean I have a teapot on my stove. It's orbiting the sun. So you're correct.
*I know what reference you're making, I just like to be a pain. :)
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by scoutt on Monday July 20, 2020 @10:57AM
(#23898441)
If you made the claim then the burden of proof is on you. The thing I was talking about is that I can automatically win the fight by asking you to provide a link.
Edit to add: a link that I know for sure you won't be able (or will be very difficult for you) to provide.
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by pinopinopino on Monday July 20, 2020 @10:55AM
(#23898424)
But there are many tea pots orbiting the sun, the path they follow is a bit weird though ^_^
Re:Any claim without a URI should be treated as suspicious
by NoSorryCannot on Monday July 20, 2020 @12:07PM
(#23899189)
While difficult for me to characterize, I feel that there is a middle ground for more casual interactions that doesn't call for maximum rigor so as to fend off the most radical claims. In practice, we can just dismiss them without engaging.
People got so used to seeing links up to the point a fight might end in a "URL request": you have to sustain your claims by bringing a link to the discussion, and if you fail to do so, you are wrong. Like if every research and every paper, study or whatever is publicly accessible and indexed.
If am I wrong, please provide a link to a study which demonstrates it.