Should saying "Proof" in your Headline, without Proof be an Instant Trip to the Hoax Forum?

Should ATS be more aggressive when moving threads that claim "proof" of the supernatural, metaphysical, or conspiracy theories to the hoax or skunk works forums??



IMHO if someone is foolish enough to post "proof" in there heading, with absolutely proof of nothing, then their thread should be instantly kicked to the hoax bin....

Thoughts?

If any admins would like to lay out the criteria for such things it would be appriciated..... as well as your personal opinion on the matter.

What proof do you have that this will work out better. You said proof in your title.

a reply to: Entreri06

No.

Hoax means intention to deceive...offering the word proof in the title, when it turns out the proof isn't exactly convincing, doesn't necessarily equal intention to deceive..it could be misinterpretation of the evidence or similar.

So no auto trip to the hoax bin imo.

a reply to: Entreri06

I don't know about moving it to the hoax bin. I'd be ok with moving it to the above top secret forum.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Go ahead and start up the "My opinion means proof" forum proposal too

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Entreri06

No.

Hoax means intention to deceive...offering the word proof in the title, when it turns out the proof isn't exactly convincing, doesn't necessarily equal intention to deceive..it could be misinterpretation of the evidence or similar.

So no auto trip to the hoax bin imo.

I disagree. I've been on ATS for years, Prob close to 6 or so now. In that time I have seen SO MANY threads that the author used proof in the headline to get hits. In the vast majority there is no question if the topic is actual proof and I can't imagaine that any reasonable person (the author) really thought it was.



Now I'm not talking about when the title is a question. "Is this proof of aliens?" That's 100% fair!

However, when some one posts "Proof Jesus is the some of God!" Then it's a testamonials of a dream he had last night.... That's purposfully ment to mislead. Aka (at least compared to the title) a hoax! Or at least skunk works.

Now post that same heading as a question. " Is my dream proof of Jesus?" And it's cool! Your not purposfully misleading people.


You could also (as I mentioned) use skunkworks for those that seem to have honestly misunderstood something or had a brain fart :p!

originally posted by: frostie
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Go ahead and start up the "My opinion means proof" forum proposal too

I recant my OP.......


The only way is to create an "My Opinion Means Proof" forum where all those are moved!!!!!!!!!!

:p

a reply to: Entreri06

One must be cautious when using the word 'proof'.

On the Rumsfeld scale there are the known knowns such as relativity, and there are the known unknowns such as Dark Energy and climate change.

Multiple, credible sources would be the key to proof-but then again some will swear to they are blue in the face that those sources are inaccurate. Using 'proof' in a headline is redundant nowadays.

Any religious thread that goes on as if God doesn't or does exist should be hoaxed. The fact is I am guilty of this myself, but really an Agnostic position is the only logical position when it comes to the existence of God. There is no 'proof' either way except what an individual experiences.

a reply to: Entreri06

Of course people post saying Proof ... but proof can be a word misused ... not by intent always

There are two types of proof
Personal proof and that which is subjected to vigorous science or academic based peer reviewed analysis

Personal proof is not always provable ... In that case it should be labelled a belief

In a way proof can only be established by one's own understanding
Not because someone else says it is so

I have no proof that quantum Physics is true as I have too little understanding of that subject

I do not think ATS being more aggressive will power the cause of Truth
Aggression only leads to conflict
Better to explain to another one's understanding in a way they may understand
If the other does not listen then to pursue one's truth aggressively is a form of Indoctrination

I am sure the ATS staff will move a thread to their appropriate forum if alerted

originally posted by: Metallicus
Any religious thread that goes on as if God doesn't or does exist should be hoaxed. The fact is I am guilty of this myself, but really an Agnostic position is the only logical position when it comes to the existence of God. There is no 'proof' either way except what an individual experiences.

If we started following this rule the word count of all religious threads would be increased by about 30% just for the disclaimers.

Most of the major threads that talk total nonsense get moved pretty quick OP. Some of them actually manage to circle the toilet bowl and even slip off the thread lists. That said, Skeptic Overlord once said that ATS isn't the university of logic and I think that applies here. So what? Someone has a different idea of what proof is to you, that's going to happen. It doesn't mean their post is completely worthless.

originally posted by: rickymouse
What proof do you have that this will work out better. You said proof in your title.

LOL, I don't think the title of a thread should be considered factual. That is why we have the option to click on a certain thread and discuss things or bail after reading the OP.

Thanks for the Laugh Rickymouse:-)
Regards, Iwinder

No proof then POOF!

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Entreri06

No.

Hoax means intention to deceive...offering the word proof in the title, when it turns out the proof isn't exactly convincing, doesn't necessarily equal intention to deceive..it could be misinterpretation of the evidence or similar.

So no auto trip to the hoax bin imo.

wait a minute...the OP has to type the title to the thread, it should be up to them to make sure IT IS true, if they are not sure, then use the another word like "allegedly"..."supposedly"..."apparently" etc.

a reply to: Entreri06

Sometimes even when proof is offered, it is disregarded.

It is very hard to define what is proof is to someone, especially in metaphysical,ufo,paranormal, or religious topics.


So my answer would be no.
Because that is not a hoax.

a reply to: Pinke


lol pinke...ATS as the university of logic.....it would be a very small graduating class, indeed

originally posted by: Darkblade71
a reply to: Entreri06

Sometimes even when proof is offered, it is disregarded.

It is very hard to define what is proof is to someone, especially in metaphysical,ufo,paranormal, or religious topics.


So my answer would be no.
Because that is not a hoax.

it SHOULD BE hard to define proof in those categories, or else they are all just fantasy stories. is it fun to be gullible, of course, is it necessarily good for you on a regular basis, absolutely not.

originally posted by: Iwinder

originally posted by: rickymouse
What proof do you have that this will work out better. You said proof in your title.

LOL, I don't think the title of a thread should be considered factual. That is why we have the option to click on a certain thread and discuss things or bail after reading the OP.

Thanks for the Laugh Rickymouse:-)
Regards, Iwinder

Where it bothers me most, is when you are participating in a "proof" thread.....

You click on it it see if there really is some neat unexplained phenomenon , but find out it's total garbage, from a total garbage source..... Then you and a few others will debunk the "proof" part. This is where I get just a little irritated...now everytime I click My ATS to see if anyone has responded, there it is...Proof all the scientists are in a massive conspiracy to help the American president pass a carbon tax!! It's like false advertising that I am constantly reminded of as I participate in the thread.

"proof" can often be very subjective when we are on the internet, writing a thread on ATS is not as objective writing a academic paper that contains actual "proof". For some on ATS "proof" can mean "this person had a dream the world is going to end, i believe precognition exists therefore this is proof", yet another member might say "this person had a dream the world is going to end but I believe precognition does not exist..... and hear are a bunch of papers that have scientific back that prove my claims".

That is a bit of a extreme example but you get what i am saying, for some if its reported by say CNN that x y and z happened then its "proof" but for others its dubious at best because they do not believe in CNNs journalistic integrity.

If however somebody posts something like "proof I am Jesus" and is doing so to knowingly deceive or is using a source that is known to publish hoax's (ie. beforeitsnews.com) then yes such threads should be moved to the hoax bin.

I personally find the whole "PROOF" thing in thread titles really annoying, but I think we just have to wade through it and point out that what the other person might see as "proof" the rest of us see as "omg op are you bat-sh*t crazy?" and take the argument from their. "No you have not proved you are the star child and this is why.......".

Proof.

Subjective.

Depends what forum it's in, how 'provable' the subject matter at hand is as well.

Let me give you an example of thread titles:

"100% Proof That I was visited by aliens"

Subjective, can't really prove or disprove that, unless the OP gets caught in an actual lie.

"100% Proof That The Earth Is Flat"

Not subjective, can be easily verified by doing a number of things.

See where making and hard and fast rule can be an issue?

This is why we take those on a case by case basis.

~Tenth