@TROY - PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR LIST OF APPROVED NEWS SOURCES

[Mzuri]

************************************************************************************
 

@Troy

 

When you have a moment, can you please provide a list of your 

approved NEWS SOURCES for this DISCUSSION BOARD, since

there's nothing stated regarding this matter in your

FORUM RULES/GUIDELINES/LEGAL DISCLAIMER.

 

If you can either post those here in this thread, or amend your 

FORUM RULES/GUIDELINES/LEGAL DISCLAIMER, that would

provide clarity for the members here.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

************************************************************************************
 

 

 

 

 

 

[Troy]

@Mzuri you already know you can link to any sources you'd like. There is no need for me to amend my forum rules

 

The issue with my challenging your sources is when you post something that is wrong then back it up with a questionable source.  If I have the time I'm gonna challenge it.

 

Have you considered reading a Black-owned newspaper.  Again they should not be your only source but if might help give you a perspective that would service you better than the Daily Mail and that other propaganda engine you linked to recently.

 

Here is a list of Black-owned newspapers: https://aalbc.com/newspapers/ 

 

[Mzuri]

************************************************************************************
 

32 minutes ago, Troy said:

@Mzuri you already know you can link to any sources you'd like. There is no need for me to amend my forum rules

 

The issue with my challenging your sources is when you post something that is wrong then back it up with a questionable source.  If I have the time I'm gonna challenge it.

 

Have you considered reading a Black-owned newspaper.  Again they should not be your only source but if might help give you a perspective that would service you better than the Daily Mail and that other propaganda engine you linked to recently.

 

Here is a list of Black-owned newspapers: https://aalbc.com/newspapers/ 

 

 

 

@Troy

 

No, clearly I cannot link to any source I would like, which is

why I am requesting clarity.

 

The issue is that you own and operate a forum/discussion 

board with no clear cut posting rules.

 

And then when someone posts something that you either 

don't like, disagree with, or don't believe is factual, you feel 

the need to challenge that individual because of their source.

 

You have done this to several people, not just to me. 

 

Someone posts a link to an article and you take a deep dive

into how old the domain name is, who owns it, what's in the

archives, where it is located, and all the rest.

 

One episode we had was about the Crypto kids.  I posted an

article from CNBC, which could also be found on Forbes and

some other financial news sites, and you wanted to argue

about whether their earnings were real.

 

I would assume that CNBC or whoever originated that article

researched the validity of their claims.  Right?

 

Why is the onus on me to prove how much money those 

children made?  Or whether Bitcoin mining is real.

 

If I see an interesting news article and decide to post about 

it here, I should not have to endure being insulted about it 

because you, or a member of the peanut gallery, feels that

the story is questionable.  Or because you think that 

The Daily Mail is a rag. 

 

And you rarely dispute the content, only the source,  

accusing people of being fringe conspiracy theorists.

 

ICYMI, mainstream media withholds information and

they don't publish negative news about Biden and

various other topics.

 

Sometimes the only place you can find information is

from alternative sources.

 

So why don't you setup some actual rules, instead

of accusing people of breaking non-existent ones. 

 

That is all I am asking you to do.

 

If you don't have time right now, please just do it

whenever you get around to it.

 

It will improve the forum for everyone.

 

Thank you.

 

************************************************************************************

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Stefan]

I've never known Troy to take someone to task for posting a comment, even if he didn't agree with it. 

A discussion group exists to allow members to talk about topics. I've been a moderator of two Black Discussion Groups and the task is made much more difficult by individuals who are desperate for attention, for validation or have an agenda. Many of these folks are hellbent on venting their rage, posting their wild assertions or engaging in personal attacks.

This is why most discussion groups or news forums post warnings about doing such, along with starting flame wars or just being an illogical thinking pain in the ass. And personal attacks are frowned upon in most discussion groups. Not only is doing so considered immature, such behavior never wins anyone over to accepting your viewpoint. 

Does anyone on here think they are qualified to determine what a legitimate news source is? 

I can tell you what it's not: An individual, an organization or a company that has a long history of making comical claims, exhibiting vicious bigotry or issuing false statements.