I'm not trying to be a jerk, nor to further this thread's digression, but isn't this sort of post exactly what you're complaining about re: lack of hard evidence and effort? You make at least one definitive assertion that, as you said earlier in this thread, is easily countered by the briefest Google search: "
[Brady] never throws the worst kind of interception." (The Lane INT in the last Super Bowl offers another example.) You're also presenting your opinion as fact ("When Brady throws it away, it is an obvious throwaway").
I'm with Bellhorn: presenting evidence to support one's claims is a rational and necessary policy. But maybe we could tone down the rhetoric calling out other posters a bit?
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed this and scratched my head.
I've always interpreted SoSH's "rules" to strongly encourage supporting documentation/work when making an original point, or when countering someone else's well-researched point. Generally, the type of "work" sought is some brand of legitimate, typically statistically-backed evidence.
But let's face it - even when those who put in the "leg work" post their evidence, it's often of the anecdotal variety: "I'm only going to include X and Y and disregard the rest because it doesn't help my point." It doesn't always happen, but cherry-picking stats and articles happens often enough - usually, it seems, when the "select" evidence favors the opinion of the poster. This usually leads to someone else pointing out that "Z" was omitted, leading to an endless thread of TL;DR anecdotal-evidence-based replies and rebuttals. That doesn't feel any "smarter," to me, than someone who posts a well-thought-out and written opinion that helps generate discussion on the message board.
But, I admit, I didn't write the rules and my interpretation should only be taken with a grain of salt (as I'm sure it will). I just love to read smart posts and replies from smart people. The vast majority of posts on this board come from what appear to be varying degrees of smart people. Whether they post an entire thesis including 50 links to various articles "supporting" their opinion may or may not make their post interesting to me. The substance is in the point itself - is it new, is it thought-provoking, and is it well-stated. I think >90% of posts here (outside of game threads) fit that criteria. To me, that's what separates SoSH from other boards and makes it such a wonderful community.
All of that said, I think soxfan is just trying to do his job. And sometimes challenging posters to include a bit more substance can be a good thing - I know it's helped me second-think what I post. But I don't think every innocuous, well-stated-but-possibly-lacking-inconsequential-evidence contribution needs to be challenged, either.
