Originally posted by roadgravel
Originally posted by maria_stardust
... It isn't a hoax until the ATS powers-that-be officially declare it a hoax.
Shouldn't that be 'it isn't labeled a hoax until the ATS powers-that-be officially declare it a hoax." Just because a group believes something
does not make it factually true. This would imply that anything on a given website, not denied by that website, must be the truth or at least close to
it.
I am not sure what to think of either of these incidents. Guess time will tell.
Generally, that is true, but the *HOAX* hammer doesn fall around here unless actual evidence towards it's necessity is revealed. Such as when someone
arrives claiming to be so and so from such and such, which is then queried by TPTB who then can verify yay or nay the veracity of said post. Case in
point, the recent "Hello Im John Titor." post, which was verified not to be him, and therefore labelled a *HOAX*.
No one can label anything a hoax, unless they have proof.
So Id suggest a "Potential Hoax" subforum, where things are evaluated to determine the outcome.
Should the OP refuse to answer questions, or deny queries, put people in ignore for valid opinions, etc etc, then the post remains there.
If the OP comes forward with Verifiable evideice that satisfies the statements put forward, its moved to ATS where the stigma of uncertainty is
removed, and the post is then left to valid discussion. This would discern betwen the many disingenuous threads made and the genuine ones.
Finally, if the OP back tracks, side steps, or evidence of their claims are found showing to be patently false, then the *HOAX* labes is applied and
the thread either moved to skunkworks, BTS or locked, depending on the intent of the author.
That surely is fair.
In a place where people put foward astonishing claims then innocent until proven guilty, but unsure until proven otherwise? surely.
just my 2 pennies.
(edited, bad grammararas)
[edit on 7/8/2008 by bloodcircle]
