The "I Didn't Comment in Another Thread" Thread

[Cadence]

Someone claiming always or never has the burden of proof. It’s on them to prove their claim.

“What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” —Christopher Hitchens

It feels easier (say on here) to offer the anecdote disproving then argue with them about the proper way to argue.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I may have written too much today, too early.

I think I might have sprained something. Brain sprain. Probably my pineal glad. That's okay- I'm sure Descartes would already think I'm soulless.

 

[Gradine]

Sorry, no. Anecdotes are not evidence. They don’t prove anything.

Anecdotes actually are evidence. Qualitative research is fundamentally about lending context to anecdotal evidence.

And in instances such as these, all anyone has to really offer are anecdotes.

 

[overgeeked]

That's a cute and "clever" way to say someone else's experience is meaningless.

Everyone’s experiences are equally meaningful to them and equally meaningless to everyone else. How you play doesn’t matter to me. Likewise, how I play doesn’t matter to you. No one’s experiences or anecdotes proves anything.

It feels easier (say on here) to offer the anecdote disproving then argue with them about the proper way to argue.

Or just don’t bother. Some people will literally argue anything and argue it forever. If someone wants to claim that everyone always plays D&D a certain way when everyone else reading the thread knows better, why bother? Someone’s wrong on the internet. Just let them be wrong. Being right doesn’t win you a prize and the chances of the other person admitting they’re wrong is near zero.

 

[Cadence]

Anecdotes actually are evidence. Qualitative research is fundamentally about lending context to anecdotal evidence.

And in instances such as these, all anyone has to really offer are anecdotes.

Unfortunately, it feels like "evidence" is often taken to have a "statistical" in front of it and refer to being useful for doing inference about the population the sample was drawn from. Because of that a lot of the other uses of qualitative research get short shrift from those who haven't looked into them. And, on the other hand simply being numeric makes some think that Data Sciencey tools can do inference without worrying about how the samples were drawn, etc...

 

[Cadence]

Or just don’t bother. Some people will literally argue anything and argue it forever. If someone wants to claim that everyone always plays D&D a certain way when everyone else reading the thread knows better, why bother? Someone’s wrong on the internet. Just let them be wrong. Being right doesn’t win you a prize and the chances of the other person admitting they’re wrong is near zero.

Why would someone bother posting in threads full of such people? (At least without putting them on ignore).

 

[prabe]

Everyone’s experiences are equally meaningful to them and equally meaningless to everyone else. How you play doesn’t matter to me. Likewise, how I play doesn’t matter to you. No one’s experiences or anecdotes proves anything.

Well, you're not entirely wrong. Congratulations!

 

[Gradine]

If someone wants to claim that everyone always plays D&D a certain way when everyone else reading the thread knows better, why bother?

Boy, ain't that the truth

 

[Scribe]

A lot of people are in denial of some pretty basic truth's about the wider community, and the various subcultures that exploded in and out of the game from the 80's to early 2000's, before it all started to stagnate.

I will not be taking questions at this time.

 

[J.Quondam]

Or just don’t bother. Some people will literally argue anything and argue it forever. If someone wants to claim that everyone always plays D&D a certain way when everyone else reading the thread knows better, why bother? Someone’s wrong on the internet. Just let them be wrong. Being right doesn’t win you a prize and the chances of the other person admitting they’re wrong is near zero.

Arguers can only argue about something if someone bothers to argue back at them. There's always the option of simply noting the truth/evidence/etc just once, and then not engaging arguers who try to pick a fight. Let the statement speak for itself.