With all due respect, the narrative adopted by those outlets or individuals is unlikely to be influenced by anything we write or refrain from writing. They took a fictional model aircraft from the Zhuhai Airshow last year and wrote how it's a Chinese 6th gen aircraft, despite all the explicit warnings by pretty much everyone who is credible. They will always find some clickbait nonsense. No matter how divorced from reality it is. So I think restricting our own discussion because of how others might twist it is counterproductive.
On the contrary, I think we somewhat underestimate this forum's influence at our peril, especially in terms of "big ticket items".
The problem is that once something is posted on the internet, it can be argued by anyone as "evidence".
Sometimes there are ideas which should be actively omitted because it may complicate the discourse.
I agree, if rumors are presented as credible, which I explicitly made sure to not do, then they should be backed up by more than their mere existence. But that shouldn't preclude the reporting and analysis of interesting chatter and overarching rumors.
I think there's a meaningful distinction between hype and the responsible observation of emerging patterns. There's value in documenting and contextualizing the kinds of narratives that precede confirmed developments. Rumors, even when not yet confirmed, often serve as early indicators. If we dismiss them outright and don't even acknowledge their existence, we risk missing opportunities to track trends before they crystallize into actually verifiable events. I believe it's analytically valid to recognize that chatter as part of the broader information environment.
That holds especially true in an environment where disclosing too much too soon carries the risk of being invited for tea. Becaue of that rumors should be assessed with greater care to determine whether they contain indicators that may later be substantiated by verifiable evidence.
Anyway, in the end you guys are the mods and it's your prerogative to set the parameters of engagement. If such rumors are not welcome, then I will, of course, refrain from posting them.
Either way, I will stop derailing this thread now.
(I'm writing this as a normal member right now rather than a moderator because I want this to be a constructive moment for every reader to reflect on.)
I am very familiar with the pattern of PLA watching and the nature in which rumours build up and eventually transition to credible rumours and then eventually to established fact: Liaoning, Shandong, Fujian, 052D, 055, 054B, 075, 076, J-10B, J-10C, J-20, J-16, J-15, Y-20, J-35, J-36, etc -- I've been through the pattern and process for all of those projects over the last 18 years.
I know the signs and the way things work, and when the rumour threshold for confirmation is lower and when it is higher.
The reason why I am saying the specific idea about Dalian possibly having parts of a CVN should not be casually posted if it is unconfirmed, is because everyone is on the general same page that at some point in the near future Dalian will be building a CVN, and that we are waiting for confirmation for it.
That confirmation could be in the form of photo evidence, or from established credible insiders with a track record putting their name up to bat for a clear statement.
For example, if Yankee tomorrow said something along the lines of confirming that Dalian had started work on a CVN and that the parts we've seen on satellite are for it, or that there are CVN specific components under the roof covers, then fine I would call that solid.
We are beyond the stage of "growing chatter of pattern of rumours that a CVN may be getting built by Dalian soon" -- we are at the "show me the confirmation that Dalian has started building a CVN, either you have it or you don't". If there's someone with a track record willing to put their name to the idea, or if we end up getting solid pictures of it, then good.
Otherwise, posting rumours and images that show nothing and don't actually add any heft to the consensus which already exists (Dalian will likely build the first CVN soon, if not already), just ends up risking giving us false starts and jumping at shadows.
That is what I meant by thoroughly justifying why something is worthy of being shared. Because we don't need a track record of random chatter at this stage for Dalian's CVN situation. What we are waiting for is credible folks to give indication that what we've been thinking of, is actually happening.
