3 ms·

If I produce a random TXT file saying jMyles is doing BIG BAD THING X, is it on you to show it is illegitimate? No, it is on whomever is producing this to show

by dkural 6y ago

If I produce a random TXT file saying jMyles is doing BIG BAD THING X, is it on you to show it is illegitimate? No, it is on whomever is producing this to show it is in fact a real email, from a real source, and not just something they made up on MS Word to win an election, especially if they make up things a mile a minute.

amadeuspagel 6y ago
> If I produce a random TXT file saying jMyles is doing BIG BAD THING X, is it on you to show it is illegitimate? It's on him to deny it, yes. He doesn't have to prove that it's illegitimate, but if he doesn't even say so, then that's reason enough to assume it's true.
- cure 6y ago
  Seems like there would be a bit of a risk for a personal DDOS attack by that logic? This attitude doesn't seem reasonable. Anyone can make up random nonsense about someone else (no federal libel laws in the US...). Acknowledging the nonsense will only legitimize it. Why should the subject of the nonsense have to invest time and energy in debunking/denying it?
  - jMyles 6y ago
    I'm simply looking for a more thorough explanation of the claim that "the entire spectrum of claims regarding Hunter Biden has been roundly debunked". Bubolinski, a recipient on the emails recovered from the laptop, has confirmed that those sent to him are genuine. Has that claim been debunked? If you are simply saying that the evidence isn't strong enough to say one way or another, fine. But "roundly debunked" means, at least to me, that there has been an investigation and that the factual claims have in some way been shown to be false. That, to my knowledge, hasn't actually happened. And sure, "anyone can make up random nonsense", but these claims aren't being made by "anyone", but by people with closeness to the situation that not just anyone can claim. And they aren't random nonsense; they are part of a pattern of explaining how a family has become fabulously rich on a 176k salary.
  - amadeuspagel 6y ago
    I don't think it's too much to ask people to deny any claim made about them by, say, the four largest papers in the US, if that claim is in fact wrong.
jMyles 6y ago
If you are in a position to know such a thing, and you assert its veracity, then I don't think I can properly say that I have "debunked" it without actually investigating your role and showing that your assertion is false. There is a difference between a claim being unproven - and properly erring on the side of caution and skepticism - and claiming that the story has been investigated and debunked (when, to my knowledge, it has not).

by dkural 6y ago

amadeuspagel 6y ago

> If I produce a random TXT file saying jMyles is doing BIG BAD THING X, is it on you to show it is illegitimate? It's on him to deny it, yes. He doesn't have to prove that it's illegitimate, but if he doesn't even say so, then that's reason enough to assume it's true.

cure 6y ago
Seems like there would be a bit of a risk for a personal DDOS attack by that logic? This attitude doesn't seem reasonable. Anyone can make up random nonsense about someone else (no federal libel laws in the US...). Acknowledging the nonsense will only legitimize it. Why should the subject of the nonsense have to invest time and energy in debunking/denying it?
- jMyles 6y ago
  I'm simply looking for a more thorough explanation of the claim that "the entire spectrum of claims regarding Hunter Biden has been roundly debunked". Bubolinski, a recipient on the emails recovered from the laptop, has confirmed that those sent to him are genuine. Has that claim been debunked? If you are simply saying that the evidence isn't strong enough to say one way or another, fine. But "roundly debunked" means, at least to me, that there has been an investigation and that the factual claims have in some way been shown to be false. That, to my knowledge, hasn't actually happened. And sure, "anyone can make up random nonsense", but these claims aren't being made by "anyone", but by people with closeness to the situation that not just anyone can claim. And they aren't random nonsense; they are part of a pattern of explaining how a family has become fabulously rich on a 176k salary.
- amadeuspagel 6y ago
  I don't think it's too much to ask people to deny any claim made about them by, say, the four largest papers in the US, if that claim is in fact wrong.

jMyles 6y ago

If you are in a position to know such a thing, and you assert its veracity, then I don't think I can properly say that I have "debunked" it without actually investigating your role and showing that your assertion is false. There is a difference between a claim being unproven - and properly erring on the side of caution and skepticism - and claiming that the story has been investigated and debunked (when, to my knowledge, it has not).