[pcwalton]

Surprisingly, I'm quite comfortable with my decision to trust the New York Times' investigative reporting team (which is what Snopes links to regarding this Instagram matter) over "archive.is" links created by Reddit and 4chan.

[Nadya]

This is an edited screenshot of your post [0] with my personal user style applied. This is an archive.is link of your post [1]. Feel free to edit or delete this post. The edited screenshot should not and cannot be trusted to be valid. The archive link, on the other hand, can be trusted to have been a 3rd party 'screenshot' of your post at the time the archive was taken.

Unless you are suggesting archive.is is a malicious actor or has any known cases of editing or changing archives made using its service. To my knowledge, there is no evidence or reason to believe either accusation.

The archive.is links are not "created" by 4chan or Reddit users. The links are created by request of the service. It shouldn't matter who requests the service as long as the service is reliable.

If the NYT investigative report team claims the archive.is links are doctored - I'd lose my faith in the NYT's ability to investigate as they have clearly failed in their duty.

[0] http://i.imgur.com/ip7pxSX.png

[1] http://archive.is/7pz3G

[pcwalton]

I regret even giving the slightest impression that the credibility of the insane "pizzagate" theory could be buttressed by the Instagram photos in question, fake or not.

[patrickg_zill]

"Please stop harassing me with evidence."

[pcwalton]

Random Instagram photos aren't evidence. They're ridiculous speculation, and those who peddle these ludicrous theories should be ashamed of the real damage this is causing to innocent people's livelihoods. The Washington Post called the allegations "absurd on their face and detached from any gossamer thread of fact" [1].

I frankly cannot believe we are even debating this here.

[1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/pizzagate-shows-how-...