J-20 5th Generation Fighter VII

minusone said:

Allegedly was the keyword, and oneninety retweeted it with his friends commenting about being ws-15 testbed.

Click to expand...

No, oneninety on it being a WS-15 testbed. Please stop making stuff up. Why are you so fast and loose with facts?

minusone said:

Why are you guys making it an issues about me?

Everything over here is based on educated guess and some insider leaks. You don't buy it, fine, move along.

Click to expand...

How is this not about you? You original post was a misrepresentation, because not only is your source a CG artist, he never even mentioned WS-15 at all. After I pointed that out, you decided to double down by making more illogical, obfuscating mis-representations, which I can only characterize as done in bad faith.

Again, our flagship forums value accuracy highly, and members are free to critique information being shared here. Our members are generally mature enough not to be offended when others correct our mistakes. If your ego can't take being contradicted, then Sinodefence isn't the place for you, because I can assure you, our members will continue to demand sources and correct any misinformation, inaccuracy, or mistake in your posts.

by78 said:

No, oneninety

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on it being a WS-15 testbed. Please stop making stuff up. Why are you so fast and loose with facts?


How is this not about you? You original post was a misrepresentation, because not only is your source a CG artist, he never even mentioned WS-15 at all. After I pointed that out, you decided to double down by making more illogical, obfuscating mis-representations, which I can only characterize as done in bad faith.

Again, Sinodefence Forum values accuracy highly, and members are free to critique information being shared here. These are our community norms. If your ego can't take being contradicted, then Sinodefence isn't the place for you, because I can assure you, other members will continue to demand sources and correct any misinformation, inaccuracy, or mistake in your posts.

Click to expand...

My original screenshot included the comment section genius. If you think he's a con, yall better stop buying into what Oneninety posted as well. Of course oneninety wouldn't say anything genius, it's one way ticket to prison if he did.

Him posting CG as hobby doesn't make him a con artist, and if he is, what does that make Oneninety who shared his posts regularly? The one with ego issue is you.

SDF is all about absolute accuracy??? Is that why yall made blunders estimating the total number of commissioned j20 prior to Zhuhai? When prior to that, many insider leaks the number to be more than 150 which had been constantly put down as fake news by this forum.

minusone said:

My original screenshot included the comment section genius.

Click to expand...

What about the comment section? How is it relevant? Because some random commenter in the comment section thinks that it's a WS-15 testbed? Do you believe everything you read online?

minusone said:

If you think he's a con, yall better stop buying into what Oneninety posted as well. Of course oneninety wouldn't say anything genius, it's one way ticket to prison if he did.

Click to expand...

What did oneninety say? Did he say it was the WS-15 testbed? Did he? Show me where he said that. Or has it occurred to you that, just maybe, he re-tweeted the images because he thought those were nice images and nothing more?

minusone said:

Him posting CG as hobby doesn't make him a con artist

Click to expand...

When did I say he was a con artist? Where? Show me. I would appreciate it if you could stop mis-representing my position and putting words in my mouth.

minusone said:

Him posting CG as hobby doesn't make him a con artist and if he is, what does that make Oneninety who shared his posts regularly?

Click to expand...

Oneninety re-tweets his posts regularly? That's news to me. I follow Oneninety on a daily basis, and I don't recall the last time he re-tweeted anything from . So what's your definition of 'regularly'? Could you at least provide two more examples of his re-tweets from this year?

minusone said:

SDF is all about absolute accuracy??? Is that why yall made blunders estimating the total number of commissioned j20 prior to Zhuhai? When prior to that, many insider leaks the number to be more than 150 which had been constantly put down as fake news by this forum.

Click to expand...

I don't recall any instance of insider leaks of J-20's numbers being outright dismissed here. Could you link me to the relevant posts where the alleged insider leaks were dismissed? Or are you mis-representing mis-remembering history? And even if such claims were dismissed at one time but subsequently became accepted, it only shows that our members are mature enough to re-assess and revise our views, which isn't something you seem to understand. You also seem to equate the desire for accuracy with omniscience and perfection, which is precisely what overly sensitive, egotistical people tend to do.

minusone said:

the CG artist that certain dude deemed untrustworthy was the one provided the clearest pic of ws-15. So, do yourself a favour and delete that image on engine thread if you think he's a nobody and a joke, not living up to SDF standard of "accuracy".

Click to expand...

Sorry, but I have to ask you again. Where is this "clearest pic of ws-15" provided by the CG artist (四川地产界高层-军事画匠)? Where is it? A link please.

minusone said:

SDF is all about absolute accuracy??? Is that why yall made blunders estimating the total number of commissioned j20 prior to Zhuhai? When prior to that, many insider leaks the number to be more than 150 which had been constantly put down as fake news by this forum.

Click to expand...

Dude, you are embarassing yourself. Get the hint, you are already deep enough, stop digging

If its a mistake, just say it was a mistake and move on

This discussion is a mess, but there is a level of usefulness if people can be civil and actually address the questions. So, I will leave it for now, but I'm watching closely.

====

@minusone that does mean you are the one that has to back up your claims and reason them out, because you are the one that put up the post.

There's nothing wrong with putting up Weibo links and making a claim that is "alleged" -- but be prepared to defend it to the hilt and make sure you have a solid reasoning for it.

Simply posting it in a flippant manner with umms and uhhs in context of a specific and significant claim, is not good enough, and it means people will call you out on it.

Alternatively, if you feel like in retrospect that your original claim was made in overreach, you are always free to retract it.

Blitzo said:

This discussion is a mess, but there is a level of usefulness if people can be civil and actually address the questions. So, I will leave it for now, but I'm watching closely.

====

@minusone that does mean you are the one that has to back up your claims and reason them out, because you are the one that put up the post.

There's nothing wrong with putting up Weibo links and making a claim that is "alleged" -- but be prepared to defend it to the hilt and make sure you have a solid reasoning for it.

Simply posting it in a flippant manner with umms and uhhs in context of a specific and significant claim, is not good enough, and it means people will call you out on it.

Alternatively, if you feel like in retrospect that your original claim was made in overreach, you are always free to retract it.

Click to expand...

What is there to defend? You either believe or move along. Why make it a big fuss about me? Time will tell who's right.

Is that how SDF operate? No one presented an ounce of truth when they claim CAC annual production rate of j20 is at ~48. Yall just accept via confirmation bias. And the leak of j10c export to Pakistan was rejected outright by SDF as if they were PLAAF spokeperson. Tone down the arrogance, when it comes to fact and latest update on PLA, this forum hardly ever broke any news ahead of the official.

Seriously, stick to highschool RCS simulation on J20.

by78 said:

Sorry, but I have to ask you again. Where is this "clearest pic of ws-15" provided by the CG artist (四川地产界高层-军事画匠)? Where is it? A link please.

Click to expand...

I stopped reading at "oneninety only retweeted once". Nah, you don't deserve anything. Stay ignorance and uninformed.

Someone’s salty I see =)

It’s actually not so much about who got what right in one thing in the end, as it is about establishing a coherent line of logic when distinguishing what to believe and how much to believe in. If people on SDF didn’t get the number of J-20 right it’s not as if they’re failing in life. Some sources previously deemed untrustworthy may actually be good, and some people may just have gotten lucky. Time can be much better spent identifying what additional avenues of information can be trusted and to recalibrate the existing estimations, not gloating and bitching. Same goes for other rumors.

At the end of the day being able to constantly learn and adjust based on the given information and to keep the door open for discussion is what this forum holds dear, and if people have trouble doing this, either leave or put on a good show before getting dumped on. If nothing else, we all can do with a good laugh

minusone said:

What is there to defend? You either believe or move along. Why make it a big fuss about me? Time will tell who's right.

Is that how SDF operate? No one presented an ounce of truth when they claim CAC annual production rate of j20 is at ~48. Yall just accept via confirmation bias. And the leak of j10c export to Pakistan was rejected outright by SDF as if they were PLAAF spokeperson. Tone down the arrogance, when it comes to fact and latest update on PLA, this forum hardly ever broke any news ahead of the official.

Seriously, stick to highschool RCS simulation on J20.

Click to expand...

In general there’s nothing wrong with sharing rumors and online chatter. The question is over how the information is presented. If you’re going to claim something is proven or conclusive, adequate support and evidence should be given to back the strength of that claim. Note, when J-20 production was claimed to be at 48+ a year we actually didn’t take the claim as fact. Instead we had a prolonged discussion here about how plausible that claim was and what kind of hard evidence we’d need to see validate the claim. The decisive factor that built consensus belief in the claim was not any particular individual or social media account or confirmation bias, but a photo showing us batch serials that could only be consistent with a production rate of at least 48 a year.

Sharing a discussion on Weibo, even one filled with speculation, is itself not a problematic thing to do. What becomes problematic is when you claim that the speculation is a confirmation of fact and when asked for evidence sufficient to back that conclusion you get defensive and shifty rather than just show the piece the evidence you think gives you certainty. Usually if a piece of evidence is strong enough you should be comfortable letting the evidence speak for itself. But you can’t expect people to believe you by default just because you can point to an account that RTs or is tagged in some kind of speculation. The issue people are taking here is really not about the Weibo post, but your justification for believing it’s strong confirmation for the claims within.

I do think that some of the criticisms against your claims can take a less hostile attitude, but because this forum *is* often used as a primary source to inform general public knowledge about the PLA you should expect that claims of a speculative nature will be vetted quite vigorously, and sometimes harshly. Everyone here can believe what they want, but for the sake of accuracy any claims without sufficiently hard evidence is going to be publicly scrutinized and tested with reasons for why we shouldn’t believe the claim too readily, just for the sake of establishing proper and transparent comprehension for how strong in terms of evidentiary standards a piece of information actually is. In my view, the point here is ultimately not about reputation, but evidentiary standard.