I'm new here, but from the many conversations i've had about pizzagate on other sites, the act of connecting seemingly irrelevant dots to pizzagate has been the most important part of this ongoing investigation!
i believe to deem a DOT (submission) off-topic to pizzagate is to prove (beyond reasonable doubt) no connection!
EDIT: "beyond reasonable doubt" means something like a "submission with without even a far-fetched, theoretical connection spelled out, and sources provided" (credit @wecanhelp for specifics)
This is a dangerous proposal. It would open up the possibility of an overwhelming number of posts not spelling out a connection at first. It should always be the responsibility of the poster to show a connection, or at the very least let the public know a rough idea of why they're thinking the topic is relevant. I don't believe any mod will remove a submission if at least a farfetched, theoretical connection is spelled out, and sources are provided.
view the rest of the comments →
nathanwblair ago
FOCUS: Connecting the DOTS
I'm new here, but from the many conversations i've had about pizzagate on other sites, the act of connecting seemingly irrelevant dots to pizzagate has been the most important part of this ongoing investigation!
i believe to deem a DOT (submission) off-topic to pizzagate is to prove (beyond reasonable doubt) no connection!
EDIT: "beyond reasonable doubt" means something like a "submission with without even a far-fetched, theoretical connection spelled out, and sources provided" (credit @wecanhelp for specifics)
wecanhelp ago
This is a dangerous proposal. It would open up the possibility of an overwhelming number of posts not spelling out a connection at first. It should always be the responsibility of the poster to show a connection, or at the very least let the public know a rough idea of why they're thinking the topic is relevant. I don't believe any mod will remove a submission if at least a farfetched, theoretical connection is spelled out, and sources are provided.
nathanwblair ago
@kevdude @wecanhelp @Crensch: yea thats what i meant by "beyond reasonable doubt"