I’d like to kindly remind you that you are making a lot of judgments about my character based on a 10,000 word post written by someone who explicitly told you he was looking for negative information and only intended to share the worst information.
Here I am only making one judgement.
I agree that the evidence isn’t perfect, but even after accounting for that, I still feel reasonably confident in my suspicion.
That is his one paragraph paraphrase of a very complex situation and I think it’s fine as far as it goes but it goes nowhere near far enough. We have a mega post coming ASAP.
I am basing my judgement off of much more than that paragraph.
Ben has also been quietly fixing errors in the post, which I appreciate, but people are going around right now attacking us for things that Ben got wrong, because how would they know he quietly changed the post?
I don’t think that saying “X lacks the skill of being able to lose” is an attack on X’s character. Maybe slightly, but not substantially.
As discussed elsewhere, I don’t think the fact that Nonlinear claims they have evidence of errors means that the conversation needs to be postponed. I think it simply means that we should update our beliefs when the new evidence becomes available. (Yes, humans are biased against doing this well.)
This is why every time newspapers get caught making a mistake they issue a public retraction the next day to let everyone know. I believe Ben should make these retractions more visible.
Here I am only making one judgement.
I agree that the evidence isn’t perfect, but even after accounting for that, I still feel reasonably confident in my suspicion.
I am basing my judgement off of much more than that paragraph.
I don’t think that saying “X lacks the skill of being able to lose” is an attack on X’s character. Maybe slightly, but not substantially.
As discussed elsewhere, I don’t think the fact that Nonlinear claims they have evidence of errors means that the conversation needs to be postponed. I think it simply means that we should update our beliefs when the new evidence becomes available. (Yes, humans are biased against doing this well.)
Strongly agreed.