’round these parts, the way to persuade people of controversial points is proof, not just assertion. So far you haven’t offered anything but big talk.
You’ve got this theory that makes a certain prediction, namely that your posts will be downvoted because everyone but you is an idiot. There is a competing theory which makes the same prediction, namely that your posts will be downvoted because they lack productive content. In order for your theory to beat out the competition, you’ll need to find some point where the predictions differ, and then demonstrate that yours is more accurate.
Surely, if we are such fools, and you understand the irrationalities involved so well, you could compose a post which manipulates those corrupt thought-structures into providing you with upvotes?
’round these parts, the way to persuade people of controversial points is proof, not just assertion. So far you haven’t offered anything but big talk.
You’ve got this theory that makes a certain prediction, namely that your posts will be downvoted because everyone but you is an idiot. There is a competing theory which makes the same prediction, namely that your posts will be downvoted because they lack productive content. In order for your theory to beat out the competition, you’ll need to find some point where the predictions differ, and then demonstrate that yours is more accurate.
Surely, if we are such fools, and you understand the irrationalities involved so well, you could compose a post which manipulates those corrupt thought-structures into providing you with upvotes?