4 ms·
Interesting idea. Unfortunately, you haven't provided any evidence or details. Can you please defend your statement that this norm will improve discourse on the
by hyperpape 6y ago
Interesting idea. Unfortunately, you haven't provided any evidence or details. Can you please defend your statement that this norm will improve discourse on the internet?
I am just asking questions.
P.S. My real opinion that this is very subtle, and it depends on what you're saying. As always, good judgment is essential. Some claims demand proof, others are more throwaway. The biggest pathology I see is where people think they should be able to say insulting things and not be called on it, as long as they don't address anyone directly.
- notacoward 6y agoThere's a well known principle that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It doesn't necessarily follow that non-extraordinary claims do not require extraordinary evidence (or elaboration etc.) but it's a good starting point. Venue also matters. Applying the standards of a courtroom or thesis defense to a non-controversial claim in a casual forum is not a good-faith behavior. It's an exhaustion tactic, unfairly placing the entire burden of proof on the original speaker as though the sea lion's preferred contrary position should be assumed as a default. That's why it is so reviled among people who actually value a spirited exchange of ideas.