[quantadev]

sorry, I only read your first sentence, but for something as well known as "Cancel Culture" if someone claims it must be proven to exist before it can be discussed then that is the person who's not acting in good faith, and has immediately discredited themselves, due to ignorance of very well known facts.

Asking people to list evidence for well known things is a well known troll-tactic, and often used as a way to deflect and redirect a discussion into the specifics of specific cases, especially when the main argument has nothing to do with any of the specific cases.

[intended]

Hey come now. I read all your sentences.

Be fair. You may be getting downvoted but I think that you are arguing in good faith.

If it helps. I’m not a troll.

There IS a norm where the person making the claim is expected to provide evidence the evidence.

If you asked me, I would have to get something to show you. (Do ask, if only it creates effort on my side to make it fair)

And I don’t think the issue here is whether cancel culture exists.

If you go through your comment chain, your original claim was that it was countless example, ie one of magnitude.

Based on that, you dismissed fact checking entirely.

Which is what people are basically responding to.

Not that cancel culture didn’t exist- but that it was mostly wrong.

And therefore - that fact checking is mostly wrong.

I also have seen fact checking in other countries other than America - it’s absolutely correct in many situations, but is still problematic because it’s unpopular.

[quantadev]

The above person was trying to pretend there's no evidence for the existence of Cancel Culture, totally discrediting themselves. To be honest, there are indeed MSM/CNN watchers who are so completely brainwashed that they do genuinely believe that; but more than likely they're trolling so I just avoid them entirely.