argante
I believe that when I interact with people on an online forum, I have faith that they will speak in a way that is in accordance with the truth. I do not ask that they prove every claim they make, because that would imply I don't trust people enough to come up with their own conclusions. That attitude does not get you anywhere. If your threshold for determining what constitutes misinformation is so low that you distrust anything that doesn't reference peer reviewed research from a scientific journal, you won't make it very far and you won't learn much, and nobody will like you. As I said, this is a forum, not a research database or a judicial court, and I'm not obligated to do the research for you. If you are interested enough in the subject at hand then I trust you will find it for yourself, and I would love to hear back from you.
fid02 set a pretty good example of how to conduct yourself in a different thread. I luckily had a link bookmarked, and he responded to the article and criticised it for being too vague and citing various other articles. He didn't criticise me specifically, he just showed why the referenced article needed more work. And I asked him for his take, cause I also thought it was vague. Neither he nor I am obligated to cite anything, but I expect people will act in good faith, and where I want clarification, I will kindly ask for any sources they have. If not, I'll find it myself if I'm really interested. Here's the discussion: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/21322-does-provider-get-unique-id-of-fido2-device/7
However I do acknowledge the challenge of what we're discussing but it extends beyond the scope of this post. How verbose should we be? What sources should we trust, and how thoroughly do we examine others' claims without stifling discussion (I'll say that again: without stifling discussion)? And perhaps most importantly, do we trust that others will speak truthfully, especially in the absence of a consensus? It's a complex problem, basically. I appreciate critical thinking but "prove it, if not, it means you are wrong" is silly.