Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Las Vegas Shooting

1…8910111214»

Comments

  • #392
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,765 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    enno99 wrote: »
    I answered you question but you refuse to acknowledge it LOL

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/john-lott-buzzfeed-and-me-the-incredible-thing-the-sites-publisher-did-using-my-name-without-permissiojohn-lott-buzzfeed-and-me-the-incredible-thing-the-sites-ceo-did-using-my-name-without

    Just to address sources

    You're quoting an opinion piece from a right-leaning news source. You've previously posted from hard right conservative sources, RT which is Russia State propaganda, and quite a few from Youtube conspiracy theorists.

    Note the pattern, how it's systematic.

    Any news outlet, no matter how credible, can make an error. However that's very different from sources that systematically produce false or distorted information on a regular basis (e.g. Fox, RT, Youtube conspiracy pundits). There's a spectrum, with quality on one end, and trash on the other.

    Wikipedia is an amalgamation of multiple sources. In this case it provides an overview, details and timeline of the Las Vegas shooting from a wide variety of sources, which corroborate each other.

    There is no alternative overview, details and timeline. Only some weak conspiracy theory based on internet denial, like every other major attack/shooting in the past 20 years


  • #393
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    it is up to the person making the claims to support them with credible evidence. that hasn't happened here. You cant expect other people to do the hard yards for you.

    Lol
    like press play or click a source link.


  • #394
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,122 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    enno99 wrote: »
    Lol
    like press play or click a source link.

    why would anybody spend time clicking a link from a site that is well known for posting lies? not all sources are created equal. also, you need to post more than just a link. link dumping is not discussion. you need to add your own opinion. post in a mature way and you will get a better response.


  • #395
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Just to address sources

    You're quoting an opinion piece from a right-leaning news source. You've previously posted from hard right conservative sources, RT which is Russia State propaganda, and quite a few from Youtube conspiracy theorists.

    Note the pattern, how it's systematic.

    Any news outlet, no matter how credible, can make an error. However that's very different from sources that systematically produce false or distorted information on a regular basis (e.g. Fox, RT, Youtube conspiracy pundits). There's a spectrum, with quality on one end, and trash on the other.

    Wikipedia is an amalgamation of multiple sources. In this case it provides an overview, details and timeline of the Las Vegas shooting from a wide variety of sources, which corroborate each other.

    There is no alternative overview, details and timeline. Only some weak conspiracy theory based on internet denial, like every other major attack/shooting in the past 20 years

    Oh i forgot you dodged the ABC covering up for rapists and pedophiles question
    and CNN and others paying up for trying to destroy a young lads life
    where on your spectrum do they fit


  • #396
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,765 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    enno99 wrote: »
    Oh i forgot you dodged the ABC covering up for rapists and pedophiles question
    and CNN and others paying up for trying to destroy a young lads life
    where on your spectrum do they fit

    It's not my spectrum, you can check yourself
    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

    That said, all outlets, good and bad have reported the same key facts about the Las Vegas shooting.


  • Advertisement
  • #397
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    why would anybody spend time clicking a link from a site that is well known for posting lies? not all sources are created equal. also, you need to post more than just a link. link dumping is not discussion. you need to add your own opinion. post in a mature way and you will get a better response.


    Well when im reading an article and it gives a source link to what they claim i click the link to verify
    if others are lazy and cant be bothered thats fine

    But i would not comment on something i cant be bothered to read
    Giving my opinion would not change the content of the article The fact i posted it says that i find it interesting and fits with the topic of the thread

    Its just another way for you guys to attack the poster not the information presented


  • #398
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's not my spectrum, you can check yourself
    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

    That said, all outlets, good and bad have reported the same key facts about the Las Vegas shooting.

    Whatever its pointless. life is to short for this rubbish


  • #399
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,122 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    enno99 wrote: »
    Well when im reading an article and it gives a source link to what they claim i click the link to verify
    if others are lazy and cant be bothered thats fine

    But i would not comment on something i cant be bothered to read
    Giving my opinion would not change the content of the article The fact i posted it says that i find it interesting and fits with the topic of the thread

    Its just another way for you guys to attack the poster not the information presented

    so i clicked on the link. i then clicked on the link it claims to be the source. the URL doesn't work.


  • #400
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Enno99 has wasted a lot of his week


  • #401
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,122 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    enno99 wrote: »
    Well when im reading an article and it gives a source link to what they claim i click the link to verify
    if others are lazy and cant be bothered thats fine

    But i would not comment on something i cant be bothered to read
    Giving my opinion would not change the content of the article The fact i posted it says that i find it interesting and fits with the topic of the thread

    Its just another way for you guys to attack the poster not the information presented
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    so i clicked on the link. i then clicked on the link it claims to be the source. the URL doesn't work.

    so i checked out dangerous.com . they closed down last year. how did you click the link to verify the source when the website is down?

    also, dangerous.com was owned by Milo Yiannopoulos so i am sure it was a bastion of integrity
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2019/10/17/milo-yiannopoulos-website-abruptly-shuts-down-after-sale/#cdc682a5a0ab


  • Advertisement
  • #402
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    The link to the police report.
    Should be the source you want to know if what is claimed is true


  • #403
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's not my spectrum, you can check yourself
    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

    That said, all outlets, good and bad have reported the same key facts about the Las Vegas shooting.




    Out of interest I was reading all the commotion about Trump and the military the hit piece The Atlantic put out
    15 or so people said it was BS even Bolton who hates Trump and some who worked for John Kelly wouldnt be a fan either
    They are also using a photo of a badly injured veteran without permission who disputes the claim
    I decided to try out your source

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/


    Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information and a clean fact check record. (5/15/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 09/04/2020)

    They are joking right

    CNN and FOX only get mixed how bad must they be
    this should give you an idea of how worthless these fact checker sites are


  • #404
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    enno99 wrote: »
    this should give you an idea of how worthless these fact checker sites are
    But newspunch and info Wars are still a ok.

    Weird position there.


  • #405
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,765 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    enno99 wrote: »


    CNN and FOX only get mixed how bad must they be
    this should give you an idea of how worthless these fact checker sites are

    Right, so you defend fruitcakes on Youtube, Infowars reporters, post from far-right sources but you attack a media bias reporting site, in a "Las Vegas shooting was a false flag" thread, on a conspiracy forum...

    Anyway, back to the conspiracy :)


  • #406
    enno99
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Hmm where do I start

    In the absence of crayons and paper let me try this

    Newspunch article source = LVMPD pdf file

    Shadowgate video source = Whistleblower who reported it in 2015

    John Cashill sources = contained in the article

    Atlantic hit piece source = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hajBdDM2qdg

    See the difference


  • #407
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,765 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    enno99 wrote: »
    Hmm where do I start

    In the absence of crayons and paper let me try this

    Newspunch article source = LVMPD pdf file

    Shadowgate video source = Whistleblower who reported it in 2015

    John Cashill sources = contained in the article

    Atlantic hit piece source = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hajBdDM2qdg

    See the difference

    Do you believe in an alternative theory, if yes, which one?


Advertisement