Even if they’re both wrong, aren’t they also both opinions? People can have (an express) opinions that are factually wrong. I think the community should just downvote those kinds of posts instead of them being removed by mods.
An opinion that is just a factually wrong idea isn’t an opinion, it’s just a false belief that something is true
Actual untruths should be removed by mods, they only serve to trick the uninformed into believing false shit. Down votes mean very little, many times someone who’s 100% factually right gets down voted because the community just doesn’t like what was said
Yeah but I’d rather not have the mods remove anything - it’s the ol’ “how do we fact check the fact checkers” conundrum.
One instance of an object or subject, can be viewed completely differently relative to your position in space and time. The observations of how something is functioning can be completely different from one observer to another, yet they can both be correct at the same time.
So how exactly do you tell the truths from the untruths without proving intentional manipulation in the first place?
Saying Hamas are the good guys is an opinion, albeit a shitty one.
Saying gender studies aren’t studies is just factually wrong.
Pretty easy to see why one would be treated differently from the other even if most people won’t agree with the first
Even if they’re both wrong, aren’t they also both opinions? People can have (an express) opinions that are factually wrong. I think the community should just downvote those kinds of posts instead of them being removed by mods.
An opinion that is just a factually wrong idea isn’t an opinion, it’s just a false belief that something is true
Actual untruths should be removed by mods, they only serve to trick the uninformed into believing false shit. Down votes mean very little, many times someone who’s 100% factually right gets down voted because the community just doesn’t like what was said
Yeah but I’d rather not have the mods remove anything - it’s the ol’ “how do we fact check the fact checkers” conundrum.
One instance of an object or subject, can be viewed completely differently relative to your position in space and time. The observations of how something is functioning can be completely different from one observer to another, yet they can both be correct at the same time.
So how exactly do you tell the truths from the untruths without proving intentional manipulation in the first place?