|
|
|
|
|
by jholman
4790 days ago
|
|
It is my opinion that "[citation needed]" can push conversations in a direction that I value, and as such is often a meaningful-to-me interaction. We can't live in a world where every statement has citations, of course. So in practice, apparently-factual statements often have to stand on the authority of their speaker. As such, it's regrettable when people utter unfounded claims in the language of authority (like "the ugly truth is"). And so it's useful (to me), for people to call out when other people are doing this, in the hopes of eventually raising the conversation. "citation needed" means "This statement is phrased to sound authoritative, but has no evidence, and I think it's wrong, and I'm willing to be persuaded by evidence". I strongly disagree with the claim that it accomplishes nothing but being rude... unless, of course, the recipient (you, in this case) has no interest in discourse. Why would fearless reason with your unjustified and implausible claim? And why would (s)he downvote your entire comment, just because the last sentence is silly? Upvotes for fearless! |
|
That is just so damned smug. Why doesn't that person have any of these lofty responsibilities about making a perfectly articulated argument? It's acceptable for them to literally type two words as their contribution to the "discourse," and the onus is pushed back onto the person who actually put some effort into it? Discourse does not mean "you will go on at length, and I will offer a simple rejection until I am satisfied with your argument."
> Why would fearless reason with your unjustified and implausible claim?
Because it's a community, it's a two-way street. If he wants to push the conversation that way, he can help it get there with an actual contribution.
edit: On second thought, removed some unnecessary snark. Others have covered my point anyway, just got a bit riled.