[scorpion9]

Originally Posted by Faust ↗

Yeah I don’t think anybody means harm. Confirmation bias is a thing. Same with me: I am not always right 100%. Maybe 95% but even I am wrong sometimes. But if I learn from it then I become a smarter or better person. Anyway, people often look for perspectives that align with a predetermined view that is both normal as well as human

Id say...as a joke but also with a bit of truth in it...

"People who think they are 95% of the time right, are more likely to be 100% wrong, than actually 95% right"

This is why conspiracy theories spread in "bundles".
A flat earther who is 95% sure that the earth is flat, is also sure that vaccines are deadly, 5G kills, chemtrails, Atlantis and UFOs are real, pyramids were built by aliens, Illuminati controls the world and so on.

You rarely find someone who believes in one conspiracy. If someone believes that they are 95% right, then they stop questioning their sources and will quickly slide down the slippery slope into an endless well of ignorance.

[duntez]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyOutpost ↗

Ahh duntez watches Rick & Morty

autocorrection tho

[WhiskeyOutpost]

Originally Posted by duntez ↗

autocorrection tho

I gave you the benefit of doubt

[Faust]

Originally Posted by scorpion9 ↗

Id say...as a joke but also with a bit of truth in it...

"People who think they are 95% of the time right, are more likely to be 100% wrong, than actually 95% right"

This is why conspiracy theories spread in "bundles".
A flat earther who is 95% sure that the earth is flat, is also sure that vaccines are deadly, 5G kills, chemtrails, Atlantis and UFOs are real, pyramids were built by aliens, Illuminati controls the world and so on.

You rarely find someone who believes in one conspiracy. If someone believes that they are 95% right, then they stop questioning their sources and will quickly slide down the slippery slope into an endless well of ignorance.

More like:
If someone believes that someone believes that they are 95% right, then they stop questioning their sources and will quickly slide down the slippery slope into an endless well of ignorance.

[DrKGSmiff]

Originally Posted by Faust ↗

I think it is the only ones they really could not ignore. I think the ones on the road is one of the two. But at least it appears impartial this way.

Anyway I understand (not really condone but really understand) war crimes committed against invading forces, but I don’t like the war crimes where soldiers use human shields. Not anti-Ukraine but just in general. I hope after all is said and done, some rules regarding this become more public

That’s the difference between the West and East, though. When we win, we do actually pursue and prosecute war crimes on our own side.

That doesn’t mean that we catch them all, or even that we don’t blatantly ignore some of them, but we do prosecute more of our own war crimes than we let pass.

The East, on the other hand, the only way to see even a single one of their war crimes prosecuted is to beat them into unconditional surrender and then hold them to account.

[Cre_AK47]

Too many threads to read, but while I do understand this is of great propaganda value to the Russian Federation, I don't think Ukraine can rationalize having the Azov battalion (now regiment) apart of their military, when that group has clearly demonstrated they're certainly, at least by origin, a pro-National Socialist Para-military group. Whether they actually believe in Nazi ideals is beyond me, but the fact they have used Nazi insignia on their uniforms like the "Wolfsangel", Black Sun, SS Bolts and of course, NSDAP Party Flag, that tells me all I need to know about what Ukraine considers to be acceptable to fight the nostalgic communist leaders and sympathizers in the current Russian Federation.

On that note, does anyone know if Germany is considering a second Operation Barbarossa once they freeze in the winter? How about the Britts with a reborn "operation unthinkable"? I prefer peace but I think this conflict will result in WW3..

[Faust]

Originally Posted by DrKGSmiff ↗

That’s the difference between the West and East, though. When we win, we do actually pursue and prosecute war crimes on our own side.

That doesn’t mean that we catch them all, or even that we don’t blatantly ignore some of them, but we do prosecute more of our own war crimes than we let pass.

The East, on the other hand, the only way to see even a single one of their war crimes prosecuted is to beat them into unconditional surrender and then hold them to account.

I agree, however, you will learn that Ukraine is not really “The West” but rather “The East”; google “Amnesty International” and “Ukraine” and you will see what I mean

Originally Posted by Cre_AK47 ↗

Too many threads to read, but while I do understand this is of great propaganda value to the Russian Federation, I don't think Ukraine can rationalize having the Azov battalion (now regiment) apart of their military, when that group has clearly demonstrated they're certainly, at least by origin, a pro-National Socialist Para-military group. Whether they actually believe in Nazi ideals is beyond me, but the fact they have used Nazi insignia on their uniforms like the "Wolfsangel", Black Sun, SS Bolts and of course, NSDAP Party Flag, that tells me all I need to know about what Ukraine considers to be acceptable to fight the nostalgic communist leaders and sympathizers in the current Russian Federation.

On that note, does anyone know if Germany is considering a second Operation Barbarossa once they freeze in the winter? How about the Britts with a reborn "operation unthinkable"? I prefer peace but I think this conflict will result in WW3..

This is beneficial to the West and USA. Though it is forbidden to mention previous cases with potential similarity, it is possible that the eventual defeat of Ukraine will create a power vacuum in this country. These groups that you mention, at least their progenitors already orchestrated a coup with western funding in Ukraine. It is possible these groups will try and take over at one point. They have stated it is their mission goal at least. Google “Misantropic Division” for example. Or watch any BBC interview with Ukraine Neo Nazi militias and you will find out.

With the current weapons those groups posses, it could get really ugly as they get to target any surrounding country. Civil targets also.

After which point, the ‘Global Community’ and USA can point to those extremist Ukrainian groups, proclaim they are an international threat and then proceed to enter Ukraine or bomb it from outside.


So now it is helpful to fund them as they will hinder Russia, but at the same time, they are a easy identifiable enemy for the usual Western ‘Round 2’ which often happens within 10-20 years

[scorpion9]

Originally Posted by Faust ↗

More like:
If someone believes that someone believes that they are 95% right, then they stop questioning their sources and will quickly slide down the slippery slope into an endless well of ignorance.

It makes no sense at all :S

If i believe that my neighbor is 95% of the time right then....I stop questioning MY sources?

What I said was essentially a paraphrasing of the "dunning Kruger effect".

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by scorpion9 ↗

It makes no sense at all :S

If i believe that my neighbor is 95% of the time right then....I stop questioning MY sources?

What I said was essentially a paraphrasing of the "dunning Kruger effect".

YES! Thank you. I couldn't remember the name for it! Lots of that going on in here.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias[2] whereby people with low ability, expertise, or experience regarding a certain type of a task or area of knowledge tend to overestimate their ability or knowledge. Some researchers also include in their definition the opposite effect for high performers: their tendency to underestimate their skills.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is usually measured by comparing self-assessment with objective performance. For example, the participants in a study may be asked to complete a quiz and then estimate how well they performed. This subjective assessment is then compared with how well they actually performed. This can happen either in relative or in absolute terms, i.e., in comparison with one's peer group as the percentage of peers outperformed or in comparison with objective standards as the number of questions answered correctly. The Dunning–Kruger effect appears in both cases but is more pronounced in relative terms: the bottom quartile of performers tend to see themselves as being part of the top two quartiles. The initial study was published by David Dunning and Justin Kruger in 1999. It focused on logical reasoning, grammar, and social skills. Since then, various other studies have been conducted across a wide range of tasks. These include skills from fields such as business, politics, medicine, driving, aviation, spatial memory, exams in school, and literacy.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is usually explained in terms of m e t a-cognitive abilities. This approach is based on the idea that poor performers have not yet acquired the ability to distinguish between good and bad performances. They tend to overrate themselves because they do not see the qualitative difference between their performances and the performances of others. This has also been termed the "dual-burden account" since the lack of skill is paired with the ignorance of this lack. Some researchers include the m e t a-cognitive component as part of the definition of the Dunning–Kruger effect and not just as an explanation distinct from it.

Many debates surrounding the Dunning–Kruger effect and criticisms of it focus on the m e t a-cognitive explanation without denying the empirical findings. The statistical explanation interprets these findings as statistical artifacts. Some theorists hold that the way low and high performers are distributed makes it more difficult for low performers to assess their skill level, thereby explaining their erroneous self-assessments independent of their m e t a-cognitive abilities. Another account sees the lack of incentives to give accurate self-assessments as the source of error.

The Dunning–Kruger effect has been described as relevant for various practical matters but there are also disagreements about the magnitude of its influence. Inaccurate self-assessment can lead people to make bad decisions, such as choosing a career for which they are unfit or engaging in behavior dangerous for themselves or others due to being unaware of lacking the necessary skills. It may also inhibit the affected from addressing their shortcomings to improve themselves. In some cases, the associated overconfidence may have positive side effects, like increasing motivation and energy.

[Faust]

Originally Posted by scorpion9 ↗

It makes no sense at all :S

If i believe that my neighbor is 95% of the time right then....I stop questioning MY sources?

What I said was essentially a paraphrasing of the "dunning Kruger effect".

I don’t know what that is, but I tried to illustrate that it was meant sarcastically.

I would never say I am only wrong 5% of the time IRL. Maybe you got this impression on DR.com where I was only wrong once; about the Russian bridge potentially being out of commission for months and assuming a cruise missile caused it based on the blast of the video and whatnot, but the important things, like UKR army committing war crimes against their own people (Amnesty confirmed it), or UKR army causing drones to detonate onto civilian areas (The UKR army confirmed it on UKR state television), and all other important stuff I got right obviously

If you scorpion9, really believe that somebody would say non-sarcastically that they are right 95% of the time, then it is you who are the type of person to regurgitate media bullshit without questioning it once, no offence to you know who.

Originally Posted by byla ↗

yes

^^^^^^^^^^
As for you know who:
I knew this person (not you Byla) thought they was liking a video where russians got destroyed so I made my post so that they could correct their mistake. I don’t respect they (=their lack of journalistic integrity) but still I felt bad about they liking a video of the ‘enemy’ as that would go against them… eh.. ‘ethics’? So our journalist really should be thanking me.