[quote=scribz]Perhaps i'm necroing these threads considering the 3 week rule, but equally considering the lack of activity here I don't see it as a big deal.[/quote]

It's fine. :P
OT needs the boost in activity anyways.

[quote=scribz]So, first note...I disagree with MDK's change, as it subtly moves it from being a matter of "When proving something is detrimental" to "Justify why you should prove it". Which to me, kinda changes the default, as I see proving things to be intrinsically a good thing, rather than a bad thing.[/quote]

Good point. :/
Just treat it then as if both of the questions are being asked.

[quote=scribz]My answer to the actual question would be "When it proves detrimental to the well beings of others, without a means to participate resolve on both parties". That basically means, anything beyond "Oh i'm a bit upset from being proven wrong, I may need to question my identity and actions in reflection to this new world view now proven".[/quote]

So if I'm reading this right (and I'm thinking I'm not) you're saying something shouldn't be proven if it causes someone else to feel bad in a severe way?

[quote=mdk]*nobody* admits they're wrong and comes away better for it.[/quote]

I have all the time.

I used to be a Christian, Homophobic, Anti-Vaccine, Pro-Life, Women suck individual.
But due to conversation, debate and admitting I was wrong I'm a Atheist, Straight Ally, Pro-Vaccine, Pro-Choice, Gender Egalitarian. And happier for it.