Conegamer said:
Aielyn said: Let me ask you this (and it's a serious question, I'm no accusing you of anything) - on what basis should be believe you?
Your information is too vague for us to believe you had real info if it comes true. It's like a horoscope predicting that "something unexpected" will happen to you this week - without more detail, it's a worthless prediction. Either you need to provide a reason for people to trust your word, or you need to provide more information so that we can confirm your information as real after the fact.
|
He works quite high up in GameStop; his information has always been reliable in the past so there's no reason to doubt it this time.
|
That he works high up in GameStop doesn't mean that he can't have been given bad information - like, say, being told by a coworker that they added a new hardware SKU to the system because of information connected to E3, and it turns out that the coworker was mistaken about the nature of the SKU. For instance, maybe it was actually something about a NFC item, and the coworker didn't specify.
When I say "on what basis should we believe you" (after correcting the typo I apparently made), what I was getting at was that, without more detail about the supposed hardware, we need more information about the nature of the information itself - why is this information to be trusted?