Contention

I consider it among the worst emotions I've experienced to be told that a statement I make is incorrect, while having verifiable documentation regarding my statements that prove otherwise. It implies that misinformation is being willfully spread. Furthermore, it secondarily implies that the other party's evaluation of my character would allow for the spread of misinformation to knowingly occur. It ultimately implies that the party assumes that I would willfully lie, which is a very low and offensive assumption to make of a person. A person who lies is a person who will manipulate the people they interact with for their own benefit. I cannot trust a person like this. As you may expect, I don't place trust in a lot of people.

The goal of this site is to provide my own sources and the basis for my own personal conclusions, supplemented by the sources provided in the articles written. This is to avoid being framed as a deceitful or unreliable, let alone a person who spreads falsehoods. The data provided on this site may contain some original research, which is contradictory for a user-collaborated website for multiple valid reasons; however, this is a private Wiki and the information presented is a mere representation of my own conclusions. If claims I make are challenged, then this site can be used to examine how said claims came to fruition.

To be abundantly clear: there is nothing wrong with mistakenly sharing false information.

This is, generally, often the result of individuals and organisations that willingly publish false info. Indeed, they are the party that generates the primary source and catalyse the spread of misinformation. The issue also occurs when the erroneous information is dictated as a fact, or if misinformation is intentionally spread for manipulative purposes. In either of these cases, the offending party has knowingly violated any expectation of mutual respect by intentionally being manipulative or willfully negligent.

Regardless of the discussion, I invariably react contentiously as soon as falsehoods begin to circulate. I occupy a hard stance that circulating falsehoods is contradictory to genuine fulfillment of any situation. Within the past few years, specifically after late 2018, I have begun to take a highly active approach to challenging any potential source of misinformation, and apprehending those who willfully spread it. It is of my opinion that those who perpetuate falsehoods and willfully maintain them will not automatically receive mutual respect until it is at least acknowledged that their source or statement isn't absolute or could potentially be misguided, due to the second paragraph. This doesn't mean that professionality in the discussion is out of the window, but it entirely means that my personal evaluation of that party, as a person, is in the gutter, when they continue to maintain a stance that is problematic and verifiably incorrect.

A lot of the world is based on falsehoods, which is unfortunate. I do not believe I can survive in a world like this; if I am ever expected to lie or knowingly step on others to get ahead, I will make the active decision to fall behind. It has been the direct cause of many a cycle of mental hell. If I am made aware of a verifiable fact, I will never be able to explicitly deny it if challenged, even if the social or legal expectation is to do so. Of course, it is always possible to avoid the question with phrases such as "I am not at liberty to disclose this information", but explicitly lying or otherwise being deceitful is fully off of the table.

Whether it's to a fault, whether it's due to underprocessed trauma, the fact remains that my singular value in living is that I remain a person who promotes publicly auditable information, if I accrue danger by disclosing the truth. While I often don't feel as if I have a conscience, the sentiment that would swallow my mind in the event of a willful lie from myself would instantly disprove this. Consider this website as evidence of this value.

This is overall a trait that is evidently problematic, in the sense that I will invariably get hung up on minor topics or details. As for the tenacity, I have been irrevocably burned and humiliated many times in the past by conceding due to plainly wanting to avoid conflict, despite the other party being apparently permitted to manipulate or disperse false info. As mentioned in the first paragraph, this tenacity evolved into maintaining a core personal value. As it stands, I place more value into maintaining accurate information than I do in myself, significantly so.

I don't know how to approach solving this issue while keeping this value intact. The discussions I engage in are not being initiated with belligerence; it merely seems that the act of questioning can itself be seen as disrespectful. Genuine attempts at discussion tend to devolve, based on this. Anything can be questioned, and keeping people from finding the truth only hurts the common understanding of any subject. This site exists to answer the questions a person may have about my viewpoints, supporting a common understanding.