Do you assume what people write on social media is true?

[Puzzledtraveller]

Forums such as DU, and sites like Facebook, chats?

You read or hear about how different agencies are using and relying so much on what people say and do on the internet but I find it odd because from my first time engaging in a online social gathering (AOL chatrooms) I never assumed people were being honest. Not so much as an intent to deliberately deceive but more like the medium allows for embellishing and creative license.

People can dot their Facebook posts with true to life information, details and also make things up as they like for example. I would think that in such an environment where doubt can be so easily cast that using social media as investigative tools can be challenging and embarrassing.

Of course the inverse could be the case and that people all to frequently reveal the truest details of their lives at their own risk. If official agencies are aware that this more likely the norm then it would be advantageous to periodically make up crap.

Of course DU can be an example. You can have heated discussions, downright fights and really get emotionally invested for what could really be all show. I chalk it up to my cynicism and general misanthropic points of view.

[Tobin S.]

1. We really don't know if anything that people say here

about their personal lives is true. However, I think you can tell when something is somewhat accurate and when something is complete bullshit.

On a message board where most people are anonymous I would expect more honesty than on a site where they are not.

[Xipe Totec]

2. I am a Literalist.

What I have posted is the literal truth, though I try not to give much in the way of geotemporal specifics.

[petronius]

3. I usually assume people are telling the truth, and if they're not I really don't

care. The anonymous internet is a different environment from the real world, and I sort of figure that however people choose to present themselves here is 'true' here. Whether that persona is also 'true' off the internet is kind of irrelevant; I'm sure many of us are the same here and in real life, many are different, and most of us aren't really aware of the extent to which our DU-persona diverges from our real-persona.

The exception would be things that matter to me in the real world. I'm not going to automatically believe some anonymous persona on the web when it comes to things that actually impact my health, career, pocketbook, etc...

[ailsagirl]

4. I remember a "DU-er" saying something to the effect...

(this was after Dubya "won" for the second time)

Ha ha!! Fooled all you guys!! I've been for Bush all along and NONE OF YOU EVEN KNEW!!!
HAHAHAHAHA

I could probably unearth it in the archives but at the time pretty much everyone else who
responded thought...



but they'd say something (in earnest) like, Wow-- I'm amazed you'd go to such lengths and
for what? (again, paraphrasing)

In other words, I remember people being more concerned than anything else.

I think, in general, people are pretty honest. I mean, we're pretty much anonymous here, right?

I don't know about Facebook, but I imagine there might be some fibs here and there (people just
being people).

[Puzzledtraveller]

5. Good example.

That kind of thing makes you think.

[ailsagirl]

6. To be honest, it gave me the creeps

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 12:15 AM - Edit history (2)

No telling what someone with that mentality is capable of...



It (nearly) goes without saying that the person was a bit wacko if he/she was pro-Bush anyway.
But why the compulsion to come here and grossly misrepresent his/herself just for the rush of
being able to tell us all off after Dub stole the election again?? It takes all kinds, I guess...

[malthaussen]

7. I tend to follow the sage advice of Rose Macauley...

... updated for the 'Net of course. "I always believe everything I read in the newspapers, as this makes them more interesting."

-- Mal