[tor-talk] Tor and Financial Transparency

[adrelanos]

The Doctor:
> On 08/30/2013 06:19 AM, mick wrote:
> 
>> unhelpful. When the abuse is aimed at refuting what could be
>> seen as conspiracy theory, I think you may be in danger of adding
>> fuel.
> 
> The problem with conspiracy theories is that any response at all,
> or nor response at all are considered equally useful validations of
> said theory.  If one makes the basic assumption that there is a
> conspiracy, one immediately assumes that anything said by the
> subjects of the conspiracy theory is false and meant to mislead.
> If someone not directly associated with the conspiracy theory says
> anything, they were duped by the conspiracy so what they say cannot
> be trusted either.  If the subjects of the conspiracy theory say
> nothing, that is interpreted as their having something to hide,
> thus, there is a conspiracy at work.
> 
> Arguing this is very likely futile, and wastes time and compute
> cycles.

I disagree. Even if you can't convince the original poster or other
hardcore conspiracy theorists, an immature reply generates more
conspiracy theorists, which otherwise would have dismissed it.
Different people are conspiracy theorists in different degrees.