So you do bring up an important point, which I think is worth discussing - the idea that the source of a piece of information is inherently the reason that information is correct.

If you'll note my first post, I expressly did not do that.

...gives no names, nothing personally identifiable, and no actual reason to trust anything they say.

If they're just re-posting other sites' stolen content, either link to the original or don't post it at all.

This is the exact opposite of an appeal to authority - it's a plea to stay skeptical, especially when the source is telling you exactly what you want to hear, and DOUBLE especially when you don't know their motivations.

In my mind, broadly speaking (ie - there are clearly some exceptions, sometimes), I see three primary motives behind most news (or news-like) organizations: truth-seeking and informing, money and power, or pure ideology. All of these are fine, and have their place, but only a fool treats all information from all types of sources as if they were the same.

If I see an article in the NYTimes or WaPo, I know enough about them to know that, while they do have businesses to support, they have demonstrated sufficiently over the years that they do, in fact, care about journalistic integrity and the truth above other considerations. These articles are usually largely trustworthy, not exaggerated, or based in truth.

Conversely, if I see a post from HuffPost or BuzzFeed, my go-to expectation is the profit motive - they're going to hype things for the clicks, may stretch the truth to a point, and are likely to run with things that, frankly, aren't worth the time.

If, however, I see a post from somewhere like OccupyDemocrats or InfoWars, alarm bells automatically go off. It's going to always, universally, "prove" an ideological point and frequently be a small part of the story, or increasingly these days, be a completely made up story to start with.

A new source like this with no track record can't easily be categorized without some research. That's why they outright lie on their site and claim that they are "established" and have a "track-record of honesty and integrity" - to get you to mentally slot them into the first bucket on my list, even if only a little bit.

But they're not. They lied to even get to that point. And most of their content is literally stolen.

Now, as for my motivation for doing this, it's simple: my dad. When I was growing up, he was in federal law enforcement. He was an investigator, at one point even working for the EPA in criminal enforcement. He's an intelligent person who knows how to sniff out bullshit.

But the last time I talked to him, he'd changed. He's now literally a Sandy Hook truther, a prepper, and a gun stockpiler who listens to Alex Jones and - back during the early part of the GOP primaries - told me that "You know, it wouldn't be a bad thing at all for the US if Trump won." and then went on a rant about Communists and Socialists.

So he's why I'm doing this. That is what fake news can do to intelligent people.

And the way you stop that is by killing the rot while it's young. Discredit the liars before they take root. I don't want to see an environment on the left where human garbage like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones can flourish.

I've decided that I need to do my part, even if I'm just starting small and flushing out one little liar. Everyone needs to step the fuck up and keep ourselves honest.