Speakeasy forum: Not looking for a bun fight. I found this concept very

and a gimlet eyed observer of people's behaviour:

"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

Rob

people find people who agree with them and they all cite each other as proof they're right.

Other views are nutcases, loonies, traitors, commies.............

Internet support have convicted some people that might still have had a small doubt that they're absolute infallible and everyone else is wrong and out to get them because they can find some blog to support their idiosyncrasies and damn everyone that disagrees.

but then I was speaking in generalities in relation to the OP.

There doesn't seem to be much attempt to understand the other here though.

But even where you have opposing views online, normally there is no discussion, just condemning the other side and everyone has a list of like minded web sites handy to back their assertion they're right.

Finding a volume of vindication for their views encourages some people not to consider any value to any other view.

Indeed, I have to wonder about the effect on a borderline mental stability individual who can find online support for his paranoid ideas or his prejudicial hatreds. Does the online availability of vindication of almost any view you can imagine encourage people to tip over?

I don't know, but sometimes I wonder.

One thing about here, at least about political arguments, I can find links to both sides given to me, without having to search myself. However, I find it's a good idea for a totally unknown site to scan some stories other than the one quoted/linked. It gives you an idea of how the site views the world, an idea of how much value you place on their opinions. Quoted or claimed facts you can search to see if they are facts or exaggerations.

The opposite side of that is posters who take extreme views (at least to the reader) and use what the reader finds to be campaigning sites for a point rather than a news site repeatedly lose their appeal, and their references may not be read because the reader has come not to trust the posters references because of repeated past disappoints in their quality.