this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
173 points (94.8% liked)

World News

32324 readers
996 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

… you’re posting a podcast titled “CitationS Needed” that’s clearly trying to pass its self off as famous YouTuber Tom Scott’s “Citation Needed” (no plural

This amounts to a conspiracy theory. It's a completely different kind of format and the hosts introduce themselves up front. If it's a knock-off, it's not a very effortful one. You'd probably have an easier time saying they stole the name, because it's a very good name.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Sorry, not everyone is willing to take: Random guy said it on a podcast, (or defender of Trump said it on a podcast cast) as a source worth listening to for trusted reporting.

Not to mention the rudeness of just assigning someone a podcast in an online discussion, or the fact the podcast had no relevance to the topic of whether Australian universities are self-censoring due to reasons of; Capitalist exchange.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Whether the podcast is relevant or not has nothing to do with what I said. Whether it is credible or not has nothing to do with what I said. Whether you are justified in feeling offended over it? Nothing to do with what I said.

For my own mental health I'm going to just not take the bait which is that parenthetical. Instead, I would like to focus on how "I refuse to listen to even two minutes of this podcast because I don't like its pedigree" is not actually a go-ahead to blindly presume things about it like the conspiracy theory I initially pointed out. You can refuse to listen to it, that's fine, but that puts you in a position of lacking a lot of information for making assertions about it. What that means is that what you can do is ignore it, or say you don't want to engage with it for such and such a reason that you actually have good reason to believe and then leave it there. That's how epistemology works.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Good job making up a quote, then knocking it down. You should totally spend your life energy getting into tangential argument that only you give a shit about.

...but maybe write 3 paragraphs next time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I was directly quoting you and anyone can see the quoted section by going like three up this comment chain, what are you on about?