For example you said that FB can't be sued over this. That's wrong - it's just unlikely to succeed under current laws.
The rest of their problems with it are probably true, but the specific point is incorrect. That's the point being made here.
Are you sure? Where?
> The issue is that statements here about topics people don't understand are often outright wrong, but go unchallenged.
Are you sure you are responding to the correct commenter? Here’s something I did write:
> It’s pretty easy to question unverifiable claims…
Which is what I recommend when you see something that you think is outright wrong.
Moaning long windedly about the fact that people say things you think are wrong is pointless.
If you see something you think is wrong or unclear to you, you can contribute to the conversation by asking a clarifying question.
I’m not misrepresenting you.
Are you somebody who doesn’t know any better? I don’t think think so, so why are you trying to protect this imaginary victim?
Do you speak with a degree of certitude? I think you do.
It’s pretty easy to question unverifiable claims, whereas complaining about other people’s tone of confidence while doing the same thing yourself just seems like it’s not likely to have a useful effect. It too is just a generic and unverifiable claim.
You aren’t wrong that misinformation spreads on public fora. However there is no evidence that you are an authority on how to resolve that issue.