Small nitpicky request: would you be willing to edit into your quotation the part that goes “just in case (those three being much more head-melty and having a much wider spread of impacts on people)”?
Its excision changes the meaning of my sentence, into something untrue. Those words were there on purpose, because without them the sentence is misleadingly alarming.
FWIW, it is concerning to me, too, and was at least a little bit a point of contention between me and each of those three while we were colleagues together at CFAR, and somewhat moreso after I had left. But my intention was not to say “these people are bad” or “these people are casually dangerous.” More “these people are heavy-hitters when it comes to other people’s psychologies, for better and worse.”
Small nitpicky request: would you be willing to edit into your quotation the part that goes “just in case (those three being much more head-melty and having a much wider spread of impacts on people)”?
Its excision changes the meaning of my sentence, into something untrue. Those words were there on purpose, because without them the sentence is misleadingly alarming.
Fair point! Done.
It is still concerning to me (of course, having read your original comment), but I can see how it may have mislead others who were skimming.
FWIW, it is concerning to me, too, and was at least a little bit a point of contention between me and each of those three while we were colleagues together at CFAR, and somewhat moreso after I had left. But my intention was not to say “these people are bad” or “these people are casually dangerous.” More “these people are heavy-hitters when it comes to other people’s psychologies, for better and worse.”