Timeline for How to handle answers based on «logic»?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 2, 2011 at 9:33 | comment | added | Suma | "Answers which don't really fit the question but have citation are upvoted blindly. How valid is the source? We shall not perform original research, but judge publications - by what?" I absolutely agree here. I think I remember this was already discussed before (with no clear result), but I have failed to find where. | |
| Aug 2, 2011 at 9:25 | comment | added | Suma | I was thinking the same when the site has started, but I have changed my mind since. Even for a "common school knowledge" it is possible to provide references (to a schoolbook if necessary). Not all references need to be to peer to peer studies. Ordinary claims do not require extraordinary references. See also meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/80/… | |
| Jul 28, 2011 at 12:18 | comment | added | user unknown | If the person already knows, how a question is addressed, it needn't ask the question. Most people don't ask wrestling questions, where they already know the answer. | |
| Jul 27, 2011 at 6:13 | comment | added | Sklivvz Mod | I think this site is not about who is right or about attempting to get to the absolute truth of anything. This site is about trying to get there through a particular method, which involves citations, experiments and facts. If a particular question cannot be address in this way, it's by definition a bad question for this site. | |
| Jul 27, 2011 at 3:37 | history | answered | user unknown | CC BY-SA 3.0 |