I think your response, especially the last paragraph, sums up what is good about your idea (and I agree somewhat with CronoDAS in principle that it is well-motivated). I hope that you enjoyed spelling it out explicitly in the same way that I enjoyed seeing it in more detail.
You did come across as picking on me—I saw your question as meaning that you didn’t agree with me and that you thought worse of me for what I’d said. It was possible to deduce what you were disagreeing with, but the emotional noise made it more difficult, and left me disinclined to pursue the matter.
I was only mildly upset, but it took me a while to decide it was worth trying to address what seemed to be your point.
By the time I’d gotten to my last paragraph, I was enjoying laying things out, but other than that, not especially fun. Neither was writing this reply.
I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to be picking on you so and it sounds like when I tried to be a little friendlier in my later comment I didn’t succeed very well.
I do think that it is important to register when a theory fails as well as when it succeeds, but I wish I had said that in a way that was less snarky.
I don’t think I’m doing a very good job of being friendly in this post either so I guess I’ll leave it at that.
I don’t think I’m doing a very good job of being friendly
I have been somewhat intrigued to observe that attempts to be friendly or conciliatory in comments seem to backfire more often than not. The dynamics are counter-intuitive.
I hope I didn’t come across as picking on you; I just know that when people form pet theories, they have trouble letting them go and this site tends to work towards a bit of nit-picking in that regard.
I think your response, especially the last paragraph, sums up what is good about your idea (and I agree somewhat with CronoDAS in principle that it is well-motivated). I hope that you enjoyed spelling it out explicitly in the same way that I enjoyed seeing it in more detail.
You did come across as picking on me—I saw your question as meaning that you didn’t agree with me and that you thought worse of me for what I’d said. It was possible to deduce what you were disagreeing with, but the emotional noise made it more difficult, and left me disinclined to pursue the matter.
I was only mildly upset, but it took me a while to decide it was worth trying to address what seemed to be your point.
By the time I’d gotten to my last paragraph, I was enjoying laying things out, but other than that, not especially fun. Neither was writing this reply.
I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to be picking on you so and it sounds like when I tried to be a little friendlier in my later comment I didn’t succeed very well.
I do think that it is important to register when a theory fails as well as when it succeeds, but I wish I had said that in a way that was less snarky.
I don’t think I’m doing a very good job of being friendly in this post either so I guess I’ll leave it at that.
Sorry—I should have gotten back to you sooner.
What happened with your comment above was that it seemed like an attempt to take charge of my emotions, and that’s an extreme hot-button issue for me.
Also, my original comment was pushing things a little in the wrong direction—putting too much emphasis on it being my theory.
So, some years later, and I’m surprised I was upset. I consider this to be progress.
I have been somewhat intrigued to observe that attempts to be friendly or conciliatory in comments seem to backfire more often than not. The dynamics are counter-intuitive.
Oh no! I just thought I was having an off day.
Although I guess to be fair I should pose my original question to you as well; have you really been looking at cases where that does not hold?
It certainly seems to be true in this case but “more often than not” makes me fear for the future.
I have tried. But I expect there are cases that didn’t catch my attention at all.