Feedback: Quality of Rumors or why B3D loathes Vetted Insiders *spawn*

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by scarythings, Jul 4, 2020.

  1. scarythings

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    3
    I don't see a problem. My post was more informative about Lockhart when it was in early stages available for devs ( even Digital Foundry confirmed before that devs hated Lockhart ) than this post for example ( https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...-speculation-spawn.61679/page-36#post-2137791 ), yet you removed it ( so what if additional info was how PS5 is easier for developing ). Mind you that Astal is a french version of MisterXmedia.




    His posts/tweets...whatever, are allowed here, but mine were not???



    So, i smell a double standards here from space
     
  2. BRiT

    BRiT (>• •)>⌐■-■ (⌐■-■)
    Moderator Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    21,097
    Look, that tweet was only for the image, not for any other claims.

    What you're posting of his tweets is pure garbage and why you don't see those other tweets posted here or anywhere else on B3D that I'm aware of. At least I don't see anyone else posting those garbage example tweets you linked to in the spoiler section.

    Also, they weren't claiming to be insiders from a place with horrible track record on vetting or insiders.
     
    PSman1700 and digitalwanderer like this.
  3. scarythings

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    3
    Fine, tweet only was for the image. But i wouldn't post any of Astal tweets. But whatever, rules are rules here. But mind you that mine post was related to earlier state of Lockhart and his situation, which was indirectly connected to this one

    https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/21/...rlett-console-next-generation-rumors-lockhart

    So, mine post was legit.
     
  4. TheAlSpark

    TheAlSpark Moderator
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    22,146
    Likes Received:
    8,531
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    Question: How do we tell what is a good or bad rumour :?:
     
    digitalwanderer likes this.
  5. scarythings

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ask Digital Foundry who said before that devs hated Lockhart
     
  6. BRiT

    BRiT (>• •)>⌐■-■ (⌐■-■)
    Moderator Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    21,097
    Though experience. However ...

    We can discuss worthy portions without being concerned about the exact rumor. In particular, look at how discussion can be had without getting into specific aspects such as the source or quality of the rumor. One recent example can be seen here, where concepts are presented and can be discussed by everyone openly : https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/2137988/

    There are also other topics that make no sense to have at this point, in particular how something (that isn't even known to exist or what the specs are) is making people feel (example: devs hate item-abc). Talking about people's feelings isn't interesting in the least as far as a Technical Site is concerned. That is why we're asking for this topic to be put on hold until we can address it from a technical aspect.

    If you want to talk of feelings about technology, perhaps you should look elsewhere? That isn't the reason why B3D exists.
     
    digitalwanderer likes this.
  7. digitalwanderer

    digitalwanderer Dangerously Mirthful
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    18,163
    Likes Received:
    2,775
    Location:
    Winfield, IN USA
    Just ask me, how else? :|
     
  8. TheAlSpark

    TheAlSpark Moderator
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    22,146
    Likes Received:
    8,531
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    Opinions can change over time at least.

    hm.
     
  9. scarythings

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    3
    Yeah, and one of my deleted post was referred to that. From Lockhart hate to user friendly, words from Borderlands 3 dev. The same crap what DF said before. But it's not legit i guess. /s
     
  10. BRiT

    BRiT (>• •)>⌐■-■ (⌐■-■)
    Moderator Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    21,097
    As explained earlier, the trouble with that statement includes but is not limited to following:

    It wasn't first hand statements.
    It wasn't verified or validated by trusted sources -- sorry, but the track record of vetting on the other forum is extremely low
    It's still about something that we don't know if it will exist or not at retail.
    It's still about something we don't have any technical specifications for.
    Because of all of the above, there's nothing anyone on this forum can add to the discussion to be meaningful.
    What would be meaningful to share on B3D is if it was a public first hand statement or from an organization that has positive track record with validation and integrity.
     
    PSman1700 and digitalwanderer like this.
  11. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    12,065
    Likes Received:
    7,029
    Going by the example above, if it shits on Sony or Playstation, it's a good rumour. If it shits on Microsoft or Xbox, it's a low quality rumour.
     
  12. BRiT

    BRiT (>• •)>⌐■-■ (⌐■-■)
    Moderator Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    21,097
    The current rumor which was removed was about how good the Lockhart development platform is.
     
  13. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    12,065
    Likes Received:
    7,029
    I guess that wasn't positive enough.
     
  14. BRiT

    BRiT (>• •)>⌐■-■ (⌐■-■)
    Moderator Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    18,795
    Likes Received:
    21,097
    It was of same quality as their other greatest hits (next-gen console specs), as explained earlier: https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/2138058/
     
  15. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    13,021
    Likes Received:
    15,765
    Location:
    The North
    I'm not a moderator, so perhaps my opinion doesn't count, but there are 2 sort of paths that the forum can take with each bit of 'rumour'.

    The first being leave it on, in this case by doing that there is more discussion around the topic. That can't be a terrible thing, discussion is good, and a forum without discussion would be dead.

    On the other hand the type of discussion matters. Before we get into the vetting process of other forums, we do not vet information or members here, we do not witch hunt, everything written is taken with a grain of salt here. The closest thing we have is a donation bet, which is really just fun charity to keep this site alive.

    That being said, science has always been about starting at a point 'A' and testing it to see where we end up say a hypothetical "B". That B can be anything, it can be anything we never imagined. It has no bias, it just exists. Our goal here at B3D is to take a starting point of usable data and work out the possibilities of B, create foundations and build upon those foundations so that our answers are rooted in each other. This sometimes becomes a heavy debate of cyclical speculation and likely some BS from time to time, but I'm empathetic to our members who would rather just get straight to the point and discard discussions that aren't worthy of reading.

    However, when we talk about 'verified' sources, or vetted sources. We are taking the end point of "B" and working our way back to "A". If B is true, working its way back to A is fairly straight forward and it becomes agreeable quickly. If it is not true this results in us warping or discarding foundational knowledge that we have because by choosing to align with "B" without knowing it's correct or not, we must warp reality from A to get to B. And we have seen this happen on this forum and many others. Many times users are vetted, but information cannot be. Whether Resetera, or Gaf, it makes no difference, we have no way to vet information and we have no way to verify it's accuracy either. But because it's been 'vetted' many readers/members may take that very tempting shortcut to declare it as 'correct' or point "B" ignoring all the conflicting information there is with our foundational knowledge that we have as a forum; I believe this is wrong for this forum. Works fine on twitter, era and gaf, where they do not have the knowledge to understand the claims so they just attack the posters directly.

    I'm fine with either way, as long as members don't crutch on 'but it's verified'. Being verified or vetted should not be crutch to stop board members from questioning the information, and those who want to believe in it should prepare to defend the positions without needing to rely on 'verification'.

    tdlr; the best type of discussion is a discussion of the claims, and seeing if it's works out or not. Who makes the claim is not important, it's how to verify the claim internally here at B3D.

    The worst type of discussion is fully qualify information because that source has been vetted, or to fully disqualifying a claim because that source has not been vetted.

    It's a claim, we seek to prove it. It shouldn't matter if it's vetted or not.

    Some claims will naturally take longer to prove than others.
     
    #15 iroboto, Jul 5, 2020
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2020
    AzBat, ToTTenTranz and BRiT like this.
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...