there is some disagreement between me and several people over this answer: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/44989/50610

Others say that I did not provide enough evidence to meet the standards of this site.

I disagree, and although I am not fully satisfied either I think I was able to add something to the discussion. There are plenty of answers here that end with an "inconclusive, not enough evidence"

So: what is the line between "inconclusive, lets not write this answer" and "inconclusive, and thats my answer" ?

| |

There are two issues here.

The first is that the answer should provide higher-quality evidence than the source of the claim. This was discussed here: May I cite a single article?

You answer repeated the claim at the same level of trust as the original source - i.e. bartender lore - which makes it inadequate as an answer.

The second is that you argue that no-one knows why wetting the glass works. That needs a reference. Yes, it is hard to prove that the lack of evidence is because the field doesn't know it (versus the answerer did poor research), so we accept a slightly lower hurdle here. This has been discussed frequently. Here are a couple of examples:

| |
  • ok, this is exactly the kind of reference I needed. I suggest you link to those meta-questions if you want a answer deleted in the future. I'll remove mine although I still think it is a valid answer. – Borgh Sep 25 '19 at 8:27

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .