Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Why I don't provide sources

As a former progressive, now right wing supporter and amateur political pundit, many times I express my opinion and get asked to provide my "source" on the matter.

Unless I am directly quoting something or someone, I don't bother providing my sources for my opinion.

Let me explain why:

Typically, this sort of challenge is not in good faith and is usually someone's challenge to "prove it" to them. I used to provide sources. I recall many a time carefully going through my links, finding the best ones, then providing them for the challenger. More often than not, one of 3 things would happen:

1. They ignore it completely, move on, or pretend they never saw the links.
2. They reject it out of hand, usually claiming that the source is unreliable and does not meet their standards for consideration.
3. They cherry pick a portion of the article, claim it's wrong, and then dismiss the entire argument due to this one factoid they feel is erroneous.

I've interacted with a few exceptions on this site, and for those I will make an attempt to share my info, but more often than not, my suggestion is for people to do their own research.

It's what I do. If I hear something I am skeptical on, I do my own searches, consult my own sources, and make up my own mind as to its legitimacy.

Thanks for reading.
This post is closed and no longer available for commenting.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
Completely agree. The "provide sources" "link" is a clear signal that the person has their mind made up and nothing will ever change it. Ditto the ones who post silly meaningless graphs as somehow proof. No back ground data no explanation as to how the numbers were derived. Just a silly graph usually attributed to some sort of 'authority'. Too funny. Not one of them are worth engaging in polite discussion.
cherokeepatti · 61-69, F
@hippyjoe1955 they want to argue in circles to discredit the conservatives. I have a little fix for that, it’s called block them.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@cherokeepatti It is very tempting. They do get rather annoying reciting news articles two years old that have long since been debunked or graphs that even the authorities who put out the graphs now disown.
GeniUs · 56-60, M
@hippyjoe1955 You are one of the worst people for ignoring sources! Even when I agree with your main point you taint the argument by dismissing out of hand other people's points. I don't know how you dare post on this subject!
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@GeniUs Read my comments.
@hippyjoe1955 hold on there joe... when i ask for attribution? I REALLY want it!
i have had my mind changed by good sourcing and I have seen some pretty bad ones too
wheni DO get a source, be sure i follow it all the way down, including where the source got IT"S info.

an example? a story a while back,, that when follwed lead to an articvl in the Union, a satiree site.. I aslo found a "conservative" site that was realy making fun of conservatives

Not All request for clarity are hostile. should i eve ask you for one? i really want it..
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@SatyrService If you really want to find out try doing some investigating on your own. The material is available. All you need to do is stop listening to the MSM and go on a hunting expedition. You never know what you will find! It is great fun!
@hippyjoe1955 [b]i DO my own research[/b],and I am so good [i]i get paid for it[/i] and i do not use pop news sources like fox and msm. pop news is Crap!
when i ask for a source it is to [i]DO that research[/i].
When a poster shares a source? i look at it, and from where it get's [i]it's sources.[/i]
when there are no sources offered I must assume
1) they can't recall where they head it (usually social media)
2) the source is embarrassing in it's weakness (this guy on twitter)
3) discourse based on Evidence is unwelcome, only "feelings" matter.

maybe you should stop listening to Tucker and crew
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@SatyrService So you think CNN is an honest broker? What exactly is your point? I have never mentioned Fox. Why? I never watch it! I don't watch any of the MSM. I tend to rely on actual data from actual sources and try my best to find the original not the tampered. BTW is Breitbart still a thing?
@hippyjoe1955 i do not think CNN is an honset broker,, I BLAME them for creating the all news all the time format, making any stry into some kinda Big Deal
[quote]is Breitbart still a thing?
/quote]
that made me very happy
This post is closed and no longer available for commenting.