Loading…
13
Got roasted in a debate thread for citing a YouTube clip as proof, now I hunt for the original document first
About 5 months ago I jumped into a thread about whether a certain chemical plant fire was covered up, and my whole argument leaned on a 12 minute video some channel put out. A guy replied with one line that stuck with me: "thats a guy reading a pdf, wheres the pdf." I felt dumb. Since then I spend the first 20 minutes of any debate just looking for the actual report, court filing, or FOIA dump before I even type a comment. My posts get way less pushback now, and honestly I argue less because half the time the original doc says something different than the clip did. Does anyone else have a rule for what counts as a real source before they bother replying?
1 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In1 Comment
ivan_harris3d ago
My rule is basically ask myself if the source would survive being called "a guy reading a pdf" and if the answer is yes, post it. Been burned by my own laziness more times than I want to admit, nothing like getting wrecked by a stranger with a link to feel humble real quick.
1