Sunny's request for cites

[G-Unit]

When you watch the news on TV or read the newspapers they don't stop after every piece of information to provide a cite.  If you dispute what is said and can be bothered to find out more, do it yourself in your own time, otherwise it gets tiresome, repetitive and disruptive.  In any case this is only a chat forum, not a court of law, it would help if everyone didn't take themselves and their research oh so seriously all the time.  It's perfectly possible to research this case without interacting with a single McCanns supporter you know!  All in my opinion.

When I first noticed this forum I was surprised to see how many posters were posting their opinions as if they were facts. Misquoting the files was also common.

What purpose is served by winning an argument using such means, I wondered? My conclusion was that winning the argument was more important than accuracy.

I joined the forum and began correcting the misleading posts because I believe accuracy to be important.

[Vertigo Swirl]

When I first noticed this forum I was surprised to see how many posters were posting their opinions as if they were facts. Misquoting the files was also common.

What purpose is served by winning an argument using such means, I wondered? My conclusion was that winning the argument was more important than accuracy.

I joined the forum and began correcting the misleading posts because I believe accuracy to be important.

How very noble of you.  But I dispute your claim that many posters posted their opinions as if they were facts.  I think most people can tell the difference between the two, even without the dreaded IMO attached.  Does this cite mania occur on other parts of the forum I wonder...?

[Sunny]

When I first noticed this forum I was surprised to see how many posters were posting their opinions as if they were facts. Misquoting the files was also common.

What purpose is served by winning an argument using such means, I wondered? My conclusion was that winning the argument was more important than accuracy.

I joined the forum and began correcting the misleading posts because I believe accuracy to be important.

Those are my thoughts too G-Unit.

Whether some of the posters treat it as "fun" to post on here or not, it is a very serious subject and should be treated as such.

When a claim is made by anyone here, then a cite should either be provided at the time of posting or upon request.   Not all posters seem to care that their claims should be factual.

This makes a mockery of this forum, but that may be some posters intention, IMO.

[G-Unit]

How very noble of you.  But I dispute your claim that many posters posted their opinions as if they were facts.  I think most people can tell the difference between the two, even without the dreaded IMO attached.  Does this cite mania occur on other parts of the forum I wonder...?

There's nothing noble about disliking false information being spread. I would expect most 'decent'people to agree with me. Whether you dispute my opinion or not that was my conclusion.

If someone told you that 5J was occupied during that week and that the people left on 4th May how would you know if that was fact or opinion?

[John]

It is forum etiquette to provide a cite when an important claim is made. Furthermore, if someone asks for a cite it is acknowledged practise to provide one if possible or to point the requester in the appropriate direction. One member in particular is always reminding us not to spread myths.

Failure to comply with the above could see the original claim removed as gossip.

[Robittybob1]

There's nothing noble about disliking false information being spread. I would expect most 'decent'people to agree with me. Whether you dispute my opinion or not that was my conclusion.

If someone told you that 5J was occupied during that week and that the people left on 4th May how would you know if that was fact or opinion?

Especially if it isn't common knowledge.

[Vertigo Swirl]

There's nothing noble about disliking false information being spread. I would expect most 'decent'people to agree with me. Whether you dispute my opinion or not that was my conclusion.

If someone told you that 5J was occupied during that week and that the people left on 4th May how would you know if that was fact or opinion?

This issue is of so little interest to me personally and of little or no relevance IMO to the case that it simply wouldn’t register on my list of things to worry about either way.  Are you suggesting I am not decent btw?  I take great exception to that inference if you were.  Who here is guilty of deliberately spreading false information then?   

[Vertigo Swirl]

It is forum etiquette to provide a cite when an important claim is made. Furthermore, if someone asks for a cite it is acknowledged practise to provide one if possible or to point the requester in the appropriate direction. One member in particular is always reminding us not to spread myths.

Failure to comply with the above could see the original claim removed as gossip.

So is it OK to direct readers to google instead of providing a cite?  In addition is it permissable to state up front when making a post that you refuse to provide a cite to back up your assertion?  Or is life really too short to care about it one way or the other?

[Brietta]

Are you saying that the original post was an opinion, even though it seemed to be being posted as a fact?

The original post appears to have made quite an impact on you since you appear to keep revisiting it vociferously ... I'm terribly sorry if it didn't do the same for me.

However there are inherent risks in continually revisiting past posts which distance of time takes the full discussion out of context.
For example in my opinion you cover yourself in no glory when reading back from ...

Quote
In your acknowledgement that you have cherry picked and lifted an out of context quote from an entirely different subject ~ Danny Collins book to be exact ~ rather reveals the paucity of your argument in a thread asking "Why do some people doubt the McCanns version of events?."

Now provide a cite showing that I am attempting to 'tar' you with 'my' brush.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10141.msg489255#msg489255

Did you ever come up with that cite?

[Robittybob1]

So is it OK to direct readers to google instead of providing a cite?  In addition is it permissable to state up front when making a post that you refuse to provide a cite to back up your assertion?  Or is life really too short to care about it one way or the other?

If I see a post like that I will delete it in future.  (Where a post states up front when making a post that you refuse to provide a cite to back up your assertion).

[Mr Gray]

Those are my thoughts too G-Unit.

Whether some of the posters treat it as "fun" to post on here or not, it is a very serious subject and should be treated as such.

When a claim is made by anyone here, then a cite should either be provided at the time of posting or upon request.   Not all posters seem to care that their claims should be factual.

This makes a mockery of this forum, but that may be some posters intention, IMO.

Some of the claims and opinions made on here invite mockery... Imo

[Vertigo Swirl]

When I first noticed this forum I was surprised to see how many posters were posting their opinions as if they were facts. Misquoting the files was also common.

What purpose is served by winning an argument using such means, I wondered? My conclusion was that winning the argument was more important than accuracy.

I joined the forum and began correcting the misleading posts because I believe accuracy to be important.

Out of interest do you correct ALL misleading posts, or only the ones it suits you to do so?  Exactly how important is accuracy to you?  Would you correct a sceptic who posted opinion as fact, or posted misleading information?  Because I’m sure that this issue is not limited to one side of the debste, yet I don’t recall your determination for accuracy resulting in admonishments and demands for cites of any members other than supporters.

[Sunny]

It is forum etiquette to provide a cite when an important claim is made. Furthermore, if someone asks for a cite it is acknowledged practise to provide one if possible or to point the requester in the appropriate direction. One member in particular is always reminding us not to spread myths.

Failure to comply with the above could see the original claim removed as gossip.

The problem appears to be when moderators don't appear to have noticed the cite request then nothing gets done and false claims may be allowed to stand.  I am not saying all claims are false but who is to know which are and which are not, if they don't get removed or cited.

Snowgirl asked for a cite recently and was told look back through the forum as the subject was discussed years ago and this poster was fed up of discussing it. That may be OK for posters who have been here for this length of time but it is unfair to those of us who are new.

[G-Unit]

The original post appears to have made quite an impact on you since you appear to keep revisiting it vociferously ... I'm terribly sorry if it didn't do the same for me.

However there are inherent risks in continually revisiting past posts which distance of time takes the full discussion out of context.
For example in my opinion you cover yourself in no glory when reading back from ...

Quote
In your acknowledgement that you have cherry picked and lifted an out of context quote from an entirely different subject ~ Danny Collins book to be exact ~ rather reveals the paucity of your argument in a thread asking "Why do some people doubt the McCanns version of events?."

Now provide a cite showing that I am attempting to 'tar' you with 'my' brush.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10141.msg489255#msg489255

Did you ever come up with that cite?

Why not just answer my questions instead of deflecting? I can assure you that it will then be forgotten.

[Brietta]

Why not just answer my questions instead of deflecting? I can assure you that it will then be forgotten.

Hardly deflection on a thread dedicated to discussion of cites particularly those in which you express an interest.

Different story though when you are called to account regarding a cite for provenance of the accusation in which you made a personal allegation/slur about a member (in this instance me) which you have failed to address.

Do you really fail to see the speciousness that makes of your stance as expressed in your posting style?