What is the minimum criteria that must be met for "Explained:" to be applied to a Metabunk thread title? I searched the site for a hard definition but struck out. My apologies if I missed it.
Does it mean that an explanation has been put forth that a moderator deems most likely out of all possible explanations to be true? As in, hypothetically, "Explained: helicopter" when that explanation might conceivably account for a plurality of the total assessed possibilities: say 20% Venus, 20% drone, <1% aliens, 25% blimp, 34% helicopter.
Does it mean that an explanation has been put forth that a moderator deems to be nearly certain? Better than 50% likely?
I didn't count them individually, but it appears there are more than 100 threads labeled as Explained: in their titles.
And I assume Explained: isn't used interchangeably with "Debunked:" which appears to have been applied to hundreds of other threads' titles. I assume Debunked: would be reserved for claims, while Explained: would be reserved for inquiries, or things that simply weren't previously understood or identified.
Does it mean that an explanation has been put forth that a moderator deems most likely out of all possible explanations to be true? As in, hypothetically, "Explained: helicopter" when that explanation might conceivably account for a plurality of the total assessed possibilities: say 20% Venus, 20% drone, <1% aliens, 25% blimp, 34% helicopter.
Does it mean that an explanation has been put forth that a moderator deems to be nearly certain? Better than 50% likely?
I didn't count them individually, but it appears there are more than 100 threads labeled as Explained: in their titles.
And I assume Explained: isn't used interchangeably with "Debunked:" which appears to have been applied to hundreds of other threads' titles. I assume Debunked: would be reserved for claims, while Explained: would be reserved for inquiries, or things that simply weren't previously understood or identified.
