uforn
Administrator
Investigator In Training
In Search For The Truth
Posts: 5,400
|
Post by uforn on Dec 2, 2012 16:22:42 GMT 1
Here's the thing with the UFO subject, we get reports all the time, video's on youtube, aticles etc etc. The source of the information is vital IMO, if a source cant be verified then it is just hearsay and is not helping anyone that does research on the subject. If you cant provide a source then dont imply that youve got some inside information that no-one else can check up on, word it as your own opinion Im a sucker for as much information as possible on anything UFO related, I might be taking this too serious but that is the way I do research, I need to verify and cross reference the evidence that is presented and the source for that evidence is vital. Rant over I wont moderate this thread you are free to voice your opinions
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 2, 2012 16:49:46 GMT 1
I think forum posting etiquette is whats needed, in my case when I post I make it clear whether it is a source which I name, a waffle which is hearsay, or my own thoughts, we have to remember this is a world wide forum and foreign speakers who use the translate system will be getting the information mixed up, but for the sake of everyone make it clear what it is that your actually saying, senior members have a responsibility to do this
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 2, 2012 18:59:07 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Dec 3, 2012 16:55:08 GMT 1
When it comes to sources, while I can see both sides, I tend to lean more towards Baz’s view vs. the rules of the forum. While I understand that not admitting who your sources are can appear to be deceitful and it has been the experience of the forum that unnamed sources has led to inaccurate reporting, hoaxing, and etc…
I also feel that the topics we deal with are considered taboo by many professionals and universities as well as being classified and by naming sources it could amount to professional suicide.
I think accepting material from unnamed sources should be accepted with some sort of disclaimer. Something along the lines of….
I have received this information from an unnamed source that I trust and can personally validate as credible.
Then as a reader of the post, we look at the credibility of the poster and make the determination on whether or not we want to trust and or accept the material or not.
While is a perfect world, everything is properly reference and validated but sometimes you just have to rely on the end user to make up their own mind on whether or not they choose to believe. That is all part of doing research.
Just my thoughts…. dbh
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2012 3:22:13 GMT 1
Hello All,
If there's one thing about ufology which is the worst loophole it's the one that say "you decide". I hate that phrase with a passion as it get's abused to the point of absurdity. I can present anything in the realm of soft data, hearsay, or any other unprovable, unfocused item whether it be video, photo, or the written word without lifting a finger to support my case. Anything. All I have to say at the end of the presentation is: "as usual, you decide". In the realm of real research endeavors there is no room for this kind of crap. Do the work, then present it and stop being so lazy and inconsiderate of the public that carefiully reads what someone writes. I say this to no individual in particular but say it to help pare down the garbage that's worth replying to as opposed to the stuff that has no substance but to fill up space on Forums.
Rant over.
|
|
|
Post by dbh on Dec 4, 2012 3:26:10 GMT 1
was that a rant? you decide!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2012 4:51:18 GMT 1
Hello dbh,
Very clever indeed! If it wasn't then I'm in the wrong place. I'm fairly sure that it was a true rant though, I re-read it several times and it was still yelling it's head off LOL.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 4, 2012 22:00:03 GMT 1
na hiflier that wasn't a rant, any way your not allowed to rant cos your a moderator lol
back to the subject, I see both sides of this and I respect both the views,
now do we want members to post stuff without posting a source, ? thats the big question, if we do allow this then I think a reason for not posting the source is allowed to be asked, as said earlier by dbh the member trusts the source and can vouch for them, but also be aware that if we find the source turns out to be from allnewsweb or other hoax spreading sites then there will be some ranting.
|
|
bazmatic
Researcher
I'm watching
Posts: 195
|
Post by bazmatic on Dec 4, 2012 22:42:54 GMT 1
I think the problem is this;
Allow posts that have a source available I.E disclose tv, ufo web and the rest. This means the site will be full of second hand news, and we can all comment about it.
Allow post with no source given and you may get the news first and everybody can quote this site and we can all comment on it.
There are good sources of information, not on the web, that know a lot more than you would imagine, they don't want to be associated with anything that would compromise their identity, job or lifestyle, but are happy to talk if they trust you to protect them.
|
|
|
Post by meldrew on Dec 4, 2012 23:02:26 GMT 1
Another thing, I haven't a clue whats being put out by the hoax sites because I don't look at them, as soon as I see its one of them I ignore it, I don't think I'm the only one either, one day one of them sites might post the truth and we won't believe them, the boy that cried wolf springs to mind, although so far L.M.H and the others have never let me down with endless crap, jamie maussen, stephen greer, john lear, bunch of tossers and there is more.
thats a rant hiflier
|
|
Aelius
Researcher
Deep Thought.
Posts: 178
|
Post by Aelius on Feb 23, 2013 12:21:56 GMT 1
Sources can only go so far as a click these days. However, with that; the validity is more invalid as we age.
|
|