How involved do you get when you see someone saying something inaccurate online?

How involved do you get when you see someone saying something inaccurate online?

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amelia G

How involved do you get when you see someone saying something inaccurate online?

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

---

What kind of inaccuracies? Example? It would take over 1000 years to fact check online.

OEC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Eyed Cat

What kind of inaccuracies? Example? It would take over 1000 years to fact check online.

OEC

---

Too true. I meant sort of how often do you see something wrong being stated online and feel compelled to engage. I generally restrain myself because the aggravation of engaging people who can't exchange ideas makes me unable to create. Sometimes, though, I think this means I am too silent on some issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amelia G

Too true. I meant sort of how often do you see something wrong being stated online and feel compelled to engage. I generally restrain myself because the aggravation of engaging people who can't exchange ideas makes me unable to create. Sometimes, though, I think this means I am too silent on some issues.

---

I don't feel compelled much anymore. If the issue is important to you, I would state your view in the affirmative. You don't need to respond directly to an inaccuracy. State affirmatively the facts in a separate article.

OEC

don't really bother........lot's of other people to do that

I'm usually at least the second or third to blabble on about stuff I know that someone on the Internet didn't, unless someone has pointed out their error, or I just feel I could have put it better. *chuckle*

if i can't disprove it in one paragraph or so, then I probably won't bother.

I do admit I have some admiration for people that have the time and motivation to fabricate complex lies about things that no one really takes seriously in the first place (read: wikipedia).

After all, in this day and age, that's 99% of all information. Not that it's all lies, but what it boils down to is that you are accepting someone's POV on a subject that you have no firsthand knowledge or experience of, and are choosing whether you want to call it the truth or not.

Even more technically, any ammount of people is still not omniscient for even a single moment. they are limited by thier experience and limited in thier telling of the experience. It's a known scientific fact (if you want to consider it one, that is) that two people will perceive the same event in different ways.

Even some of this thread could be inaccurate. I'm not getting involved.

yes. i stayed up all night, not to correct, but to watch the regulars on the Army Rumour service forums rip into some idiot 14 year old (whom I've had several run ins with on other forums and in an international game) who went into the forum offensively trying to defend airsofters when ARRSE was having a bit of a pisstake thread about those who pretend to be millitarry.

it ended up about 80 pages long iirc. a good laugh

I don't. it's not worth it..... but that pic is hilarious.

i dont either.

but then i again i rarely do in real life either... proving points is just never a big thing with me.

*except if it makes the other person look like an idiot... i love doing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

if i can't disprove it in one paragraph or so, then I probably won't bother.

I do admit I have some admiration for people that have the time and motivation to fabricate complex lies about things that no one really takes seriously in the first place (read: wikipedia).

After all, in this day and age, that's 99% of all information. Not that it's all lies, but what it boils down to is that you are accepting someone's POV on a subject that you have no firsthand knowledge or experience of, and are choosing whether you want to call it the truth or not.

Even more technically, any ammount of people is still not omniscient for even a single moment. they are limited by thier experience and limited in thier telling of the experience. It's a known scientific fact (if you want to consider it one, that is) that two people will perceive the same event in different ways.

---

haha yeah I used to love a good storyteller. I have come to the conclusion that such people are a bad combination of the wrong kind of crazy and ignorant though. I assume people take a lot with a grain of salt, but some don't. Thus, I simply don't deal with them. It still is funny when I run across silly shit like wickedpedia. Just a bit tragicomic as well.

OEC

I'm too much of a lurker (on the net and IRL) to get involved, unless it's with friends.

it depends on where i see it, like if its on a forum i post alot on. if i care about the subject or not. i would call them out on being an idiot or a fool. i would just correct the inaccuracy. in a nice way. i'd hate to be seen as a 'troll,' or trying to pick a fight.

IF i can pick out a mistake likely others already have and correcting someone isn't what I'm into. Besides if it takes up more than a few lines I get bored and start to drift off into something that is totally off topic and forget what I was saying...so no I don't like eggs in my potato salad.

Only if they seem smart, and it will make for an interesting debate.

It's useless to debate or argue with an idiot.