@RadoslawMerkx @murshedz It could “destroy misinformation.” But that mere possibility is, at face value, no more likely to be realized than any other associated with this proposed “open discussion.” Since you cite only that possibility, though, do you have some reason to believe that it’d be more likely to come to pass than any other? If so, what is it? And if you don’t have such a reason, what do you think the purpose of holding this “open discussion” would be?

@RadoslawMerkx @murshedz Yes, that *could* happen. But the general claim that increased information raises the chances of destroying misinformation, by itself, is insufficient to show that a Rogan-led “open discussion” would in fact be more likely to achieve that than to generate more misinformation. If you agree about that, what else makes you believe that it’s more likely to do the former than the latter? If you disagree, what am I missing about the principle?

@RadoslawMerkx @murshedz I’m not presuming that. So, I’m sorry to say, I see no point in my trying to answer this question.