Skip to main content
8 votes

Ban Fact Checking Websites in Answers

No, we should not ban any website based on what type of website it is. It doesn't matter if it is a fact checking, left leaning, right leaning or any other type of site. All that matters is that it is ...
Joe W's user avatar
  • 5,052
6 votes

Power user Edit(orializing) controversial questions to make them weaker?

So, there are two ways of addressing this question. One is to accept your premise: That there is a rogue on this site, who has let their "poweruser" status go to their head. Then the answer ...
Oddthinking's user avatar
  • 144k
5 votes

Can statistics from this site be used to show that conservatives make a majority of fallacious and misleading claims?

I think this would likely not make a good Skeptics.SE question. Predominantly, there is no notable claim here. If there were, it might deal with my next objection: the claim is so full of vague ...
Oddthinking's user avatar
  • 144k
3 votes

Ban Fact Checking Websites in Answers

This question contains a number of false premises. Scientific Skepticism does not require an adversarial system, although one may be used. More specifically, Scientific Skepticism does not require ...
Oddthinking's user avatar
  • 144k
3 votes

Can statistics from this site be used to show that conservatives make a majority of fallacious and misleading claims?

In order to do that you would need to have some metric that could confirm how representative this site was in terms of it's user base. For example, if the majority of users had a bias to one side of ...
Aaargh Zombies's user avatar
2 votes

Is there *really* a reason why so many questions *really* need to include the word 'really'?

This answer started life as a comment on Robert's answer but grew too long (and it is itself an input into this "discussion"-tagged meta post.) I don't quite understand how the inclusion of the word "...
Wildcard's user avatar
  • 469

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible