user-1: Is this site Buddhist if its users routinely claim that parts of the Buddhist canon are not authentic?
It happens, but I think that the answer is clear -- no.

user-1: Personally, I think it's a disservice to wrap this kind of claim with the flavor of certainty while providing but a rough sketch of a justification or no justification at all. I suppose it could mislead readers into thinking that the claim is common knowledge, when it's only someone's personal opinion.
But I have no problem if it's explicit that the claim is the author's personal opinion.

-1: <p>Is this site Buddhist if its users routinely claim that parts of the Buddhist canon are not authentic?</p>

<p>It happens, but I think that the answer is clear -- no.</p>
 -1: <p>Personally, I think it's a disservice to wrap this kind of claim with the flavor of certainty while providing but a rough sketch of a justification or no justification at all. I suppose it could mislead readers into thinking that the claim is common knowledge, when it's only someone's personal opinion.</p>

<p>But I have no problem if it's explicit that the claim is the author's personal opinion.</p>
