# If a poster is wrong more than half the time, would you take them seriously? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 7, 2013, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238 "2013-09-07T09:31:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Truman\_Burbank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecc23a/32.png) [@Truman\_Burbank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truman_Burbank)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/81 "2013-09-08T05:04:25Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Things I’ve learned today: > > 1. Many people here believe they are rarely, if ever, wrong, because they are careful. I say those people are full of shit. > > 2. It’s okay to personally attack posters for being wrong outside of the pit. The rules say those people are full of shit, as do I. > > 3. Going by the standards articulated here about what makes a poster credible or not, most of you have proved yourselves to lack credibility, because of points 1) and 2). If you can’t be trusted to understand the basic rules of civility and the fact of your own fallibility, then you can’t be trusted to have any idea of what you’re talking about. Things **Adaher** has learned today: {null set} ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/82 "2013-09-08T05:09:51Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Things I’ve learned today: > > 1. Many people here believe they are rarely, if ever, wrong, because they are careful. I say those people are full of shit. I am careful. But I have been spectacularly wrong – often because I didn’t realize I was letting myself believe something more because I WANTED to believe it than because I had carefully researched it. During the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, I posted a story about union workers on electrical crews in New Jersey that had turned away assistance from Virginia crews there to help, because the Virginia crews were not unionized. I didn’t make it up…I was quoting a publication. But that publication, in it’s haste to publish the story, had engaged in too-shoddy fact checking. And of course that story was not accepted at face value here – it was vigorously checked. And it shortly became clear that I was way off base. It happens. When I was convinced of my error, I simply owned up to it. It took more than a simple denial; I had a cite, after all. But eventually it became clear my cite was valueless. Now,in my area of expertise, that is very unusual, because I know how to do legal research and I know enough about the law that even a tempting wrong answer isn’t likely to slip past me. > [@](#): > > 1. It’s okay to personally attack posters for being wrong outside of the pit. The rules say those people are full of shit, as do I. It’s not OK. But it’s OK to heap scorn on wrong arguments. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/83 "2013-09-08T05:15:04Z")
Definitely. I haven’t actually been excusing being wrong so much as saying it’s not a sin worthy of personal condemnation. If it is, then the nation’s leaders and experts are not meant to be taken seriously, and by SDMB standards, are almost uniformly idiots. However, I would never complain about my arguments being ridiculed. That’s all part of the spirit of debate. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/84 "2013-09-08T05:29:03Z")
Self-effacing? Is that a new flavor of troll? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/85 "2013-09-08T05:30:42Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Definitely. I haven’t actually been excusing being wrong so much as saying it’s not a sin worthy of personal condemnation. If it is, then the nation’s leaders and experts are not meant to be taken seriously, and by SDMB standards, are almost uniformly idiots. > > However, I would never complain about my arguments being ridiculed. That’s all part of the spirit of debate. The problem was already mentioned, even granting the dubious point that you never complain when the argument is being ridiculed, an acknowledgement that it was not a good one to use is never made by you. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/86 "2013-09-08T07:45:11Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Things I’ve learned today: > > 1. Many people here believe they are rarely, if ever, wrong, because they are careful. I say those people are full of shit. > > 2. It’s okay to personally attack posters for being wrong outside of the pit. The rules say those people are full of shit, as do I. > > 3. Going by the standards articulated here about what makes a poster credible or not, most of you have proved yourselves to lack credibility, because of points 1) and 2). If you can’t be trusted to understand the basic rules of civility and the fact of your own fallibility, then you can’t be trusted to have any idea of what you’re talking about. You really are a complete loser. ---
**Author:** ![sylmar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b782af/32.png) [@sylmar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sylmar)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/87 "2013-09-08T09:30:48Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > You really are a **complete loser**. Thanks for the class and order clarification Colibri. What’s the family? Confused-idae? Dipshiticus? Weinie-dorcus? ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/88 "2013-09-08T10:29:19Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > You really are a complete loser. When I saw that quoted above, and the last two words were bolded, I couldn’t help but hear it in the voice of Don Pardo in Weird Al’s “I Lost on Jeopardy!”. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/89 "2013-09-08T11:07:54Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The whole point of this is that sometimes I do. And I will try to do better. No, you won’t. You’ve spent this entire thread saying that you’re no more wrong than anybody else, it’s not a problem to be wrong, and there’s not always a right answer anyway. You will continue ruining intelligent debates by requiring everyone to refute your personal nonsense, without even realizing it. [Real Men of Genius] I salute you, Dunning-Kruger poster boy, for showing us all that Psychologists occasionally have theories that work. [/RMoG] ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/90 "2013-09-08T11:11:35Z")
I can ruin a discussion? You have bigger problems than I thought. ---
**Author:** ![sylmar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b782af/32.png) [@sylmar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sylmar)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/91 "2013-09-08T11:42:43Z")
Ah … Negat Penuriosus Denial-idae! Anyone collecting them? He/she’s free for the taking. Please? I’ll pay… ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/92 "2013-09-08T12:04:12Z")
So your claim, adaher, is that you aren’t fundamentally different in your level of wrongness from the average Doper. This is, I think we all agree, a rather extraordinary claim, which therefore requires extraordinary evidence, which so far hasn’t been forthcoming. No one here is claiming that everyone here is perfectly correct, except for you. What people are saying is that if you piled up everyone’s wrongess, the average Doper would have, perhaps, a good-sized hill to their name. You have Olympus Mons. So pointing at other peoples’ hill doesn’t really address the fundamental disagreement. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/93 "2013-09-08T13:00:57Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The reason I invoked the President was to ferret out a standard here. If it could be proven that I was wrong half the time, would that make me discredited? How about a quarter of the time? Heck, **adaher** , if it could be proven you were wrong half the time, that would constitute a major improvement over your current mark. As for a quarter wrong: It’s OK to have dreams, but try getting yourself down to 50% wrong first. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/94 "2013-09-08T14:06:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Actually, the claim that most posts on SDMB are right is the extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence, not mine. I didn’t make that claim. Back up your assertion, if you can. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/95 "2013-09-08T14:31:50Z")
I said people are wrong a lot. You disagreed. That implies that you believe the opposite: people are not wrong a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/96 "2013-09-08T14:37:28Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I said people are wrong a lot. You disagreed. That implies that you believe the opposite: people are not wrong a lot. Back up your assertion or back down from it. I made no assertion other than a disbelief in yours. Every single time you post that I should back up something I didn’t assert, you will look like more of an idiot to every other poster on this message board. Every time you avoid backing up your statement, you will look like a bigger fool as well. Back it up to back down from it. Why is it so hard to do? Are you unable to? Then why would you make such a broad, sweeping statement if you can’t back it up with facts? ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/97 "2013-09-08T19:23:29Z")
> [@sylmar](#): > > Thanks for the class and order clarification Colibri. What’s the family? Confused-idae? > Dipshiticus? Weinie-dorcus? _Ignoramus tedious_, in the family Wankeridae. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/98 "2013-09-08T20:24:50Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > And saying, “Stop being so ignorant about everything” is personal. It doesn’t cross the moderation line, but it’s still personal. So? “Personal” and “accurate” are not contradictory. ---
**Author:** ![Subterraneanus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Subterraneanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterraneanus)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/99 "2013-09-08T20:38:36Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I ask because as may of you know, I’m wrong a lot. I make dumb arguments, I recite facts from memory that turn out to be laughably wrong. Some would say that because of that, I’m not worth being taken seriously. Some have even accused me of bad motives. And I’m not alone. It seems to be a common thread throughout the internet that if you disagree with someone, they are obviously an idiot or evil. Of course not everyone does this, but too often vitriol is directed at posters just for being wrong. > > It’s a stupid, immature thing to do, because most people are wrong a lot. But let’s assume that those who cast the stones are without sin. What if they were shown that many of the people they do take seriously, or even admire, are also wrong more often than they are right? > > You’re all familiar with Politifact’s Truth-O-Meter. But I’d like you all to look at it in a new light. It’s amazing how often pundits and politicians say incredibly stupid things. And Politifact isn’t even measuring gaffes, but statements of fact that are 99% of the time from prepared statements, often vetted by other very well educated people. I’ve said before that Town Square veterans often have a better command of the facts and make better arguments than politicians, but if you look at the Truth-O-Meter I think it proves it. > > Take the President for example: > > [PolitiFact | Barack Obama](http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/) > > He’s wrong more than half the time he opens his mouth. If we’re generous and give him credit for half true statements, he’s still wrong a quarter of the time. > Paul Krugman, a Nobel economist who a lot of people admire, and who can’t resist calling those who disagree with him idiots, doesn’t have the greatest record either: > > [PolitiFact | Paul Krugman](http://www.politifact.com/personalities/paul-krugman/) > > He’s right more often than he’s wrong, but he’s had a couple of laughers himself. > > Really, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who looks good when measured in this way. So basically, this is a call for civility. Everyone gets things wrong. The best response to dumb arguments or facts that are pure malarkey is to correct it, move on, and let people draw their own conclusions about whether a poster is worth paying attention to. Engaging in a campaign of condemnation and belittling says more about the poster doing it than the target. > > I realize that this is the opposite of a pit thread, but I figured it was the best place for it. I’ve read many of your posts, and it is clear enough that you are an idiot. ---
**Author:** ![Gagundathar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a183cd/32.png) [@Gagundathar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gagundathar)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2013, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/100 "2013-09-08T21:38:15Z")
**Adaher** , in the spirit of this board, I would ask that you support your claim that you are no more wrong about your assertions than the majority of the posters of this board. You would be doing us all a service if you were to actually engage a poster on a point of dissension and bring evidence to support your assertion. You would be doing yourself a service as well. Or, alternatively, you can continue to act like a child and act out against the ‘meanies’ who won’t accept your world-view without substantial reasons to do so. Remember, many of us here have jobs that require that we recognize when we are incorrect and correct for our errors. My robotics control systems (for one example) don’t work correctly because I am convinced that they will, but because I have tested them and have had others test them for boundary conditions, bad input data, faulty actuation chains and any number of possible vectors of error. I make mistakes much more often than I succeed, but that is the nature of experimentation. It takes a certain kind of courage to acknowledge when an idea that ‘felt’ so great turned out to be a completely false trail. I know nothing of your real-life existence, but I am willing to wager that you are not a scientist. You appear to take yourself too seriously to be effective at such an avocation. Have you ever considered stand-up comedy? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238.md?page=6)