Talking Footy

I want some ideas from you lot on how to handle claims without proof.

There are a number of options but one is to give the claimant a time limit after someone asks for proof. An example may be 3 hrs after the report is made and claim challenged. Note, to help me with time frames, and to keep track of the challenges a report would be the best method.

The claimed can either recant the claim or find proof within the time limit, or the claim is deleted.

What do you guys think? Would this work?

Any other suggestions?

Depends on how easy the proof is to get, if it's a link to a simple website (footy, paper whatever) a day? If you are waiting on an email, a week?

And how about making your mates back up their statements for once?

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Depends on how easy the proof is to get, if it's a link to a simple website (footy, paper whatever) a day? If you are waiting on an email, a week?

And how about making your mates back up their statements for once?

I've told you how. Report it when you ask for proof so I can follow it up.

In the example you used above, make your statement but say aim my opinion .........and I will claim it when I can provide proof.

The time frame is up for discussion.

IMO, AFL fans don't like FACTS.

Like this aye xman?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2660&p=31705#p31705

NSWAFL wrote:

Not true. AFL is played in more countries than RL. I've already proven that on another thread.

Now this little weed is one of the worst, make him prove his point or give him a holiday.

I applaud your attempt to formulate something in this regard but this unfortunately requires the use of logic.

Logic suggests that certain independant sources like ABS or DFAT would be accepted beyond question.
Logic suggests that certain resources like annual reports would be accepted beyond question.
Logic suggests that independant media reports carry some qualified weight.
Logic suggests that certain involved sources like the AFL or NRL might be acceptable though would need qualifiaction.
Logic suggests that refences by linked and dated.
Logic suggests that refences be current as possible.
Logic suggests that photos unless fully documentated ,are of limited value .
Logic suggests that the original statement and the challenge to that statement are clearly defined
and that the challenger has not assumed or misinterpreted any of the statement.
Logic suggests that participants would have to be sensible.
History suggest suggests that the last point would be frigging impossible.
History suggest suggests that if you can't have consesus on abuse you can't have consensus on a judgement.
History suggest suggests only autocratic leadship could prevail.

Logic suggest there would be instances where a finite time frame would be detrimental to a poster.
e.g. a poster is so pissed off with the moronic behavior of another poster (no names mentioned here parafeel eh) that he's decided to get a life and do something useful like sleep in......................and so not attending.

Derp****.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Like this aye xman?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2660&p=31705#p31705

NSWAFL wrote:

Not true. AFL is played in more countries than RL. I've already proven that on another thread.

Now this little weed is one of the worst, make him prove his point or give him a holiday.

I already have and the onus is on you to prove me wrong. You have refused to.

Where Vogue?

I can't see it.

Xman wrote:

I want some ideas from you lot on how to handle claims without proof.

There are a number of options but one is to give the claimant a time limit after someone asks for proof. An example may be 3 hrs after the report is made and claim challenged. Note, to help me with time frames, and to keep track of the challenges a report would be the best method.

The claimed can either recant the claim or find proof within the time limit, or the claim is deleted.

What do you guys think? Would this work?

Any other suggestions?

Sheezus christ Xman, what the fuuuuuuk are you up to here? I thought i told you to not act out on a whim like this? You're bound for trouble and unkie cos lettuce has highlighted this, in a particularly uncritical conservative manner. This setup is doomed and silly, it will create mayhem. Posters in here need to understand that you cant fukking prove everything over the net, and some people could not be bothered presenting a detailed report on a friggin fightclub forum.

Xman I'd like you to pm me anytime you come up with these crackpot ideas from now on ok? Promise, ok?

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

I want some ideas from you lot on how to handle claims without proof.

There are a number of options but one is to give the claimant a time limit after someone asks for proof. An example may be 3 hrs after the report is made and claim challenged. Note, to help me with time frames, and to keep track of the challenges a report would be the best method.

The claimed can either recant the claim or find proof within the time limit, or the claim is deleted.

What do you guys think? Would this work?

Any other suggestions?

Sheezus christ Xman, what the fuuuuuuk are you up to here? I thought i told you to not act out on a whim like this? You're bound for trouble and unkie cos lettuce has highlighted this, in a particularly uncritical conservative manner. This setup is doomed and silly, it will create mayhem. Posters in here need to understand that you cant ******* prove everything over the net, and some people could not be bothered presenting a detailed report on a friggin fightclub forum.

Xman I'd like you to pm me anytime you come up with these crackpot ideas from now on ok? Promise, ok?

Hence I asked for feedback.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

I can't see it.

Well go back and read the responses.
It'll take forever because is buried in pages on abuse and pretty pics.

King-Eliagh wrote:

This setup is doomed and silly, it will create mayhem.

Hence my suggestion for autocratic control. i.e. Cos789 to mod.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Posters in here need to understand that you cant ******* prove everything over the net, and some people could not be bothered presenting a detailed report on a friggin fightclub forum.

Then don't post.

Xman wrote:

I want some ideas from you lot on how to handle claims without proof.

There are a number of options but one is to give the claimant a time limit after someone asks for proof. An example may be 3 hrs after the report is made and claim challenged. Note, to help me with time frames, and to keep track of the challenges a report would be the best method.

The claimed can either recant the claim or find proof within the time limit, or the claim is deleted.

What do you guys think? Would this work?

Any other suggestions?

Personally not a fan of claims without proof being deleted. Whilst I can see merit in one having to prove their claims, once deleted how can we ever go back and look, laugh and ridicule those who failed to prove their claim. Just my two cents worth.

Beaussie wrote:

Xman wrote:

I want some ideas from you lot on how to handle claims without proof.

There are a number of options but one is to give the claimant a time limit after someone asks for proof. An example may be 3 hrs after the report is made and claim challenged. Note, to help me with time frames, and to keep track of the challenges a report would be the best method.

The claimed can either recant the claim or find proof within the time limit, or the claim is deleted.

What do you guys think? Would this work?

Any other suggestions?

Personally not a fan of claims without proof being deleted. Whilst I can see merit in one having to prove their claims, once deleted how can we ever go back and look, laugh and ridicule those who failed to prove their claim. Just my two cents worth.

Fair point. Maybe edited with the words "failed claim".