Requirements for “links” violate rights and freedoms

[Meister]

Do you need the fact that there is a branch of positivism? Why can't you find it yourself if you don't know it?

Because you stated the fact, it's YOU who must provide a source for your stated fact. It's not for me to go look it up.

Now that you know what's required, you have to adhere to the rules of the board, just like everyone else.
Enjoy the board

 

[rupol2000]

LOL Of course not. The key word is "legitimate" source. Meaning - you can't bring in your 13-year-old nephew's blog as a source unless the topic is about Anime.

Where can I find a list of "legitimate" sources?
Why do you think my 13-year-old nephew is an idiot?

 

[Woodznutz]

Forum rules cannot violate the constitution. We are guaranteed freedom of speech and we are not obliged to "link" anywhere

We need Elon Musk to buy this forum.

 

[rupol2000]

Show me one of YOUR many threads where you stated that you "assumed" anything?
I can show you where you are giving statements of facts and not opinions.
YOU go back and look at YOUR threads OP's and reread them.

I don't see anything there that needs to be specifically confirmed. I don't write my topics for idiots. These are well-known (for literate people) facts. If you don't understand something, you could ask instead of closing the topic.

Do you need confirmation that Santa Claus brings gifts to children?

 

[Meister]

I don't see anything there that needs to be specifically confirmed. I don't write my topics for idiots. These are well-known (for literate people) facts. If you don't understand something, you could ask instead of closing the topic.

I disagree

 

[Meister]

We need Elon Musk to buy this forum.

Or rupol, then he can create his own rules.

 

[rupol2000]

Because you stated the fact, it's YOU who must provide a source for your stated fact. It's not for me to go look it up.

Now that you know what's required, you have to adhere to the rules of the board, just like everyone else.
Enjoy the board

I don’t know exactly what facts I should “confirm”; how illiterate the public is assumed to be by default?

Why can't I ask for confirmation before closing a topic?

 

[Meister]

I don’t know exactly what facts I should “confirm”; how illiterate the public is assumed to be by default?

Why can't I ask for confirmation before closing a topic?

Just link your facts in the opening post and your threads stay open.

 

[Magnus]

Where can I find a list of "legitimate" sources?
Why do you think my 13-year-old nephew is an idiot?

My mistake. What the heck was I thinking of? Engaging you in a discussion about legitimate sources.

Buh-bye, retard.

 

[rupol2000]

What is a "fact"? It’s a fact when I see something with my own eyes. Why should I assume that some link is a “fact”? How can you get a "fact" from a link?
A corrupt journalist wrote something, is this really a fact? Then what's the point of a link? What does it confirm?

 

[The Duke]

Forum rules cannot violate the constitution. We are guaranteed freedom of speech and we are not obliged to "link" anywhere

 

[Meister]

What is a "fact"? It’s a fact when I see something with my own eyes. Why should I assume that some link is a “fact”? How can you get a "fact" from a link?
A corrupt journalist wrote something, is this really a fact? Then what's the point of a link? What does it confirm?

That question was already answered by Magnus.

What that link confirms is that you didn't just pull something out of your ass
and stated it as fact.

 

[rupol2000]

If I made a mistake in anything, it is no different from the mistake of the person I am referring to. Then why this circus with links?
This is similar to the training of collectivism and the denial of individualism, they say that if the news is promoted in the media space, it becomes a “fact”.
This is at least a zombie tool.
Normal people will figure out for themselves who they will trust.

 

[Seymour Flops]

There are a couple of very liberal posters on here who specialize in made-up facts. Not completely made up by themselves, but based on come headline they read without checking the article for confirmation.

Very recently, someone claimed that Eric Trump had become angry after saying that he had nothing to do with Trump's financial statements and being shown proof that he did. No link, just a claim. I easily refuted the claim and the poster disappeared from that thread.

I never report that kind of thing. If Democrats were required to back up factual claims, they would just stop posting at all.

 

[rupol2000]

Let's say I saw something yesterday, something interesting, but I couldn't film and document it. In that case, I can't say about it because I don't have a link?

 

[Unkotare]

Forum rules cannot violate the constitution. We are guaranteed freedom of speech and we are not obliged to "link" anywhere

What a dumbass.

 

[Meister]

If I made a mistake in anything, it is no different from the mistake of the person I am referring to. Then why this circus with links?
This is similar to the training of collectivism and the denial of individualism, they say that if the news is promoted in the media space, it becomes a “fact”.
This is at least a zombie tool.
Normal people will figure out for themselves who they will trust.

Opening posts require more than a "Copy and Paste" with a link. You need to include relevant on-topic material of your own.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

 

[rupol2000]

There are a couple of very liberal posters on here who specialize in made-up facts

I know these people. This is an apparatus of federal propaganda and state education. A fake factory that spends millions of taxpayer dollars to zombify and deceive taxpayers.

Part of this money goes to bribing moderators who close objectionable topics under various pretexts

 

[rupol2000]

Opening posts require more than a "Copy and Paste" with a link. You need to include relevant on-topic material of your own.

Where in the constitution does it say that my freedom of speech is limited by these conditions?

 

[Woodznutz]

Because you stated the fact, it's YOU who must provide a source for your stated fact. It's not for me to go look it up.

That depends on whether you want a statement confirmed by an outside source or if you want to rebut a statement. If you want to rebut someone's statement, it should be up to you to provide the source, imo.