KG4Ever wrote:Camden0916 wrote:KG4Ever wrote:Camden0916 wrote:KG4Ever wrote:LOL, so I guess any quote found on twitter qualifies as a rumor?? The quote Cam posted was from a guy who had 55 followers prior to the Tweet (now up to 65).
You should look up the definition of "rumor" and come back to me. Also, I specifically noted that it wasn't validated information at the time, but here we are hours later and it appears that individual had a very real source(s) close to the situation -- much closer than anyone here. And that's why I shared it. Once again, thanks for being my number one fan. :)
Dude, just say this is a tweet I read and site your source and then the reader can determine whether or not its credible. Why be so vague? I suspect you want to appear more dialed in than you really are.
You should have taken the L quietly on this one. And I include sources when they're credible or legitimate -- Woj, Shams, Stein, Krawczynski, etc. If the rumor or take is from a very sketchy source or an outlet that I don't feel confident in, then I feel no need to include anything additional other than a disclaimer that what I shared might be bullshit, which is what I did here. It turns out that this person was actually somewhat clued in. That's pretty much the end of it.
Seriously, get over yourself. If we are talking Ls, I think you are the king of that on this board.
Guys, c'mon. KG, there was no need to sound quite so dismissive when you saw the source. And, as it looks like the case may be, even if the first source of a rumor is a bit dubious, it doesn't guarantee the rumor isn't true.
And Cam, to reiterate, I wasn't going after you. And I appreciated you citing WCCO later in the thread when it was reported. Regarding sourcing though, in my opinion, it's always best to give a source like that
especially when it may be a sketchy source. Sourcing lets other people evaluate the legitimacy of the source for themselves and maybe start to work to verify the credibility of the claim. It puts the credit or blame closer where it is due when (hopefully) the truth comes out, and ultimately it's a check against people just making stuff up. Thanks for the sleuthing here. Just wanted to know where you found something out.
EDIT: One other reason for sourcing: spreading unverified information without citing a source, even if we qualify it as unverified, lends the idea a credibility that can't be double checked. It might be the that the rumor is true (as it looks like the case is here) or not, but without a source, it still kind of sticks in our minds as if it
is true, even if it turns out to be false. I hate to say it (because it gave me the willies), but my mind was already kind of imagining that it was true even before I saw that other outlets were reporting it, but in my head, I know I should have waited to believe it until it was more verified.