The Lemon Fool

I reported a post (after a while thinking about it) that stated things which were factually incorrect.

That report was closed with no explanation - could someone explain why?

It was Chas49 that closed it FYI.

the0ni0nking wrote:I reported a post (after a while thinking about it) that stated things which were factually incorrect.

That report was closed with no explanation - could someone explain why?

It was Chas49 that closed it FYI.

Surely what you were actually doing was expressing a personal opinion that a claim that another Lemon made was not true.

I do not know what this alleged "fact" was. But if you disagree with a claim then the correct response is surely to refute it by argument, and not to seek to censor it.

Being wrong is not contrary to the TLF guidelines.

Yeah, I get that. And I'm sympathetic to those arguments.

The fact in this case was about the number of postal votes in the Rochdale by-election. That's a number. And it was stated. But the poster chose to claim some other number.

Lootman wrote:

the0ni0nking wrote:I reported a post (after a while thinking about it) that stated things which were factually incorrect.

That report was closed with no explanation - could someone explain why?

It was Chas49 that closed it FYI.

Surely what you were actually doing was expressing a personal opinion that a claim that another Lemon made was not true.

I do not know what this alleged "fact" was. But if you disagree with a claim then the correct response is surely to refute it by argument, and not to seek to censor it.

Being wrong is not contrary to the TLF guidelines.

This is exactly how I think such disagreements are best resolved, by discussion. C.

csearle wrote:

Lootman wrote:Surely what you were actually doing was expressing a personal opinion that a claim that another Lemon made was not true.

I do not know what this alleged "fact" was. But if you disagree with a claim then the correct response is surely to refute it by argument, and not to seek to censor it.

Being wrong is not contrary to the TLF guidelines.

This is exactly how I think such disagreements are best resolved, by discussion. C.

An opinion is I think x or I think y. That wasn't the scenario I'm highlighting.

the0ni0nking wrote:Yeah, I get that. And I'm sympathetic to those arguments.

The fact in this case was about the number of postal votes in the Rochdale by-election. That's a number. And it was stated. But the poster chose to claim some other number.

But again TLF is not Wikipedia. If i post that 1+1=3 then that is wrong and you should argue that case. But there is no documented basis on which TLF should remove my factual error.

And of course in many cases there might be scope for debate about such facts. That is a decision for the community to make through debate, and not a moderation issue.

In this particular case, there was no such scope for debate.

But I don't really care - we all know it was bullsh!t so let the individual continue with that.

You could maybe appeal to the poster in question to ask us to remove the whole sub-discussion once you've both agreed a factual error has occurred. C.

csearle wrote:You could maybe appeal to the poster in question to ask us to remove the whole sub-discussion once you've both agreed a factual error has occurred. C.

Why would I do that?

I don't really care about opinions -as we all have different opinions and that is fine. But the reason I reported the post was because it was a lie - if LemonFool are happy to have lies stated then fair enough.

the0ni0nking wrote:

csearle wrote:You could maybe appeal to the poster in question to ask us to remove the whole sub-discussion once you've both agreed a factual error has occurred. C.

Why would I do that?

I don't really care about opinions -as we all have different opinions and that is fine. But the reason I reported the post was because it was a lie - if LemonFool are happy to have lies stated then fair enough.

What was the purpose of your report other than to have the post, with which you disagreed, removed?

I just suggested a way you might achieve this. If you are no longer bothered then I'll carry on watching the Pogues tribute band here at the Forum, TW. I won't trouble you further. C.

I reported the post because it contained information that was a lie.

the0ni0nking wrote:I reported the post because it contained information that was a lie.

So just refute it, publicly. It is unlikely that any moderators are going to start reseaching the minutiae of this specific "fact" and, in Godlike-style, decreeing the truth. That's what you guys do! C.

PS Sometimes I do too, but as a standard post.

csearle wrote:

the0ni0nking wrote:I reported the post because it contained information that was a lie.

So just refute it, publicly. It is unlikely that any moderators are going to start reseaching the minutiae of this specific "fact" and, in Godlike-style, decreeing the truth. That's what you guys do! C.

PS Sometimes I do too, but as a standard post.

Also calling something a lie is not just alleging falsehood or an error. It is accusing the other Lemon of deliberate deceit and dishonesty.

That seems to fall foul of the TLF rule to always give the other guy the benefit of the doubt. And it feels like playing the man, not the ball.

Lootman wrote:Also calling something a lie is not just alleging falsehood or an error. It is accusing the other Lemon of deliberate deceit and dishonesty.

That seems to fall foul of the TLF rule to always give the other guy the benefit of the doubt. And it feels like playing the man, not the ball.

Yes, that's why I reported it. It was a lie. I'm very disappointed that calling it a lie seems to be an issue.

the0ni0nking wrote:

Lootman wrote:Also calling something a lie is not just alleging falsehood or an error. It is accusing the other Lemon of deliberate deceit and dishonesty.

That seems to fall foul of the TLF rule to always give the other guy the benefit of the doubt. And it feels like playing the man, not the ball.

Yes, that's why I reported it. It was a lie. I'm very disappointed that calling it a lie seems to be an issue.

It isn't. Lootman was being Lootman. Just call out the lie (as you deem it to be) and that's fine. C.

the0ni0nking wrote:I reported the post because it contained information that was a lie.

Which of the posting guidelines do you assert this post breaches?

Posting a 'fact' that is wrong breaches none of them AFAICS. Asserting someone did it deliberately to mislead seems to be a breach of the guidelines in itself, in which case both of you appear to be breaching this one (albeit in different ways).

"Robust debate is allowed, but it must remain polite and respectful at all times. Stick to the facts and argue the points discussed, rather than criticise the poster."

One for Room 101 really, I'd have thought.

Mike4 wrote:
Which of the posting guidelines do you assert this post breaches?

You make an entirely reasonable point. But, I would position my view as this:

1. if you state something that is factually incorrect then that is unacceptable and should be called out as such
2. I f you have an opinion which differs from mine then so what - such is life.

In this case, I think it was 1. not 2. I think any bulletin board has an obligation to reflect the truth.

If the guidelines aren't aligned with that then so be it/

csearle wrote:Lootman was being Lootman.

I plead guilty m'lud, but claim diminished responsibility.

the0ni0nking wrote:

Mike4 wrote:
Which of the posting guidelines do you assert this post breaches?

You make an entirely reasonable point. But, I would position my view as this:

1. if you state something that is factually incorrect then that is unacceptable and should be called out as such

<snip>

I agree. But then I feel responding with a post pointing out the error and quoting the correct number with an authoritative link, would be a satisfactory resolution.

the0ni0nking wrote:

Mike4 wrote:
Which of the posting guidelines do you assert this post breaches?

You make an entirely reasonable point. But, I would position my view as this:

1. if you state something that is factually incorrect then that is unacceptable and should be called out as such
2. I f you have an opinion which differs from mine then so what - such is life.

In this case, I think it was 1. not 2. I think any bulletin board has an obligation to reflect the truth.

If the guidelines aren't aligned with that then so be it/

I agree your case 1 applies. We are not able to adjudicate in all this stuff. So the way forward, is for the refutations to take place by way of discussion.

I feel a report should be confined to infringements of the rules. An improvement recommendation that the rules be extended to fact checking would be fine. C.