> There seems to be a propensity on HN to question everything no matter how absurd it is on it's face. There's a tendency on HN (and other places) to make stat

> There seems to be a propensity on HN to question everything no matter how absurd it is on it's face. There's a tendency on HN (and other places) to make statements based on "facts" that aren't actually known by the person making the claim. > "I can assure you that Obama wouldn't be happy if his daughter became a porn star". Unless you have specific knowledge about Obama, you can't accurately "assure" that. Yes, it's likely that Obama, like most fathers, would prefer that his daughters not be porn stars, but some fathers are different in this respect. To "assure" in this case requires Obama-specific information. > Oh yeah, how do you know that he wouldn't be happy? Do you know him and have you spoken to him about that specifically????" You seem to think that that's wrong. How about explaining why? I agree that speaking to Obama isn't necessary, but surely some Obama-specific information is. Do you disagree?