3 ms·

1. My point was the opposite, people should be free to make allegations of vote fraud, as they are to allege that it was fair. But blanket calling one side of t

1. My point was the opposite, people should be free to make allegations of vote fraud, as they are to allege that it was fair. But blanket calling one side of the argument misinformation, is a waste of time for everyone, unless there is a good claim to back it up. An allegation of rape can be misinformation but it probably has to be investigated first? You shouldn't just call it misinformation without backing it up. 2. After an investigation you can still make claims, but you would be more liable to lawsuits. Or, in an online discussion, it would be more probable that you would be wasting everyone's time. e.g. people that keep insisting Trump works for Russia. For that we have conspiracy forums. Your comment was completely unnecessary. I'm not sure what to call it, perhaps "the phantom footbal referee"

jancsika 6y ago
> My point was the opposite, people should be free to make allegations of vote fraud, as they are to allege that it was fair. Even broadly speaking, there are two separate buckets for each claim: 1. allegations of voter fraud supported by evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) 2. wild allegations of voter fraud 3. allegations of fair election results supported by evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) 4. wild allegations of fair election results There were myriad examples of #2 circulating around the election, many debunked even before they started to spread more widely. I see no reason to call these claims anything other than misinformation. Given the incentives for each party after the initial vote tally of the election, there happened to be a lot more examples of #2 than anything else. But the exact same logic applies to #4, esp. in authoritarian countries where that kind of misinformation is more common. Edit: typo