Let's be real here for a second. Pizzagate, especially during its early stages, was plagued with people making claims they couldn't back up. It's too easy for someone to say something false that sounds realistic that people latch on to. By the time people figure out it's false, others have already accepted it as fact. Rule #2 clearly says that all claims must be backed up by evidence. That rule is for the betterment of the sub-verse, even if it makes us put in some extra work. Don't let your emotions get the best of you. Re-post with the correct sourcing and save the issues with the mods for more obvious problems.
I understand why the rule was created. That's why I cited the artist, the song and the exact wording of the offending part
Even if I had posted a link to the song and it turned out that I was lying, the effect would have been the same than not posting the link
The key difference is that this is something easily verifiable with a first-party source (the song itself)
The purpose of rule 2 is to stop people from posting false or unsupported/unverifiable facts and disinformation
For example if the headline of my post said "Hillary Clinton found to have penis," and I posted no proof, there's no way anybody could verify that statement one way or the other
view the rest of the comments →
IShallNotFear ago
Let's be real here for a second. Pizzagate, especially during its early stages, was plagued with people making claims they couldn't back up. It's too easy for someone to say something false that sounds realistic that people latch on to. By the time people figure out it's false, others have already accepted it as fact. Rule #2 clearly says that all claims must be backed up by evidence. That rule is for the betterment of the sub-verse, even if it makes us put in some extra work. Don't let your emotions get the best of you. Re-post with the correct sourcing and save the issues with the mods for more obvious problems.
Cantilever ago
I understand why the rule was created. That's why I cited the artist, the song and the exact wording of the offending part
Even if I had posted a link to the song and it turned out that I was lying, the effect would have been the same than not posting the link
The key difference is that this is something easily verifiable with a first-party source (the song itself)
The purpose of rule 2 is to stop people from posting false or unsupported/unverifiable facts and disinformation
For example if the headline of my post said "Hillary Clinton found to have penis," and I posted no proof, there's no way anybody could verify that statement one way or the other