I think this is the first post that's a DH5 on pg's How to disagree scale (http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html). Not only th

I think this is the first post that's a DH5 on pg's How to disagree scale (http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html). Not only that, the OP is charitable enough to explicit state why it's not a DH6: Paul Graham wrote an article about an idea. The idea is generally correct - bias in a decision process will be visible in post-decision distributions, due to the existence of marginal candidates in one group but not the other. But the math was wrong. // That's ok! Very few ideas are perfect when they are first developed. I'm not good enough at statistics to check that OP's math is sound, but this is the mindset of a scientist. OP reasons rigorously, finds a way to salvage the core insight and improves on it. As readers can see, it took quite a lot of work and prior knowledge to do. If I were pg I would consider putting a link to this post on both the disagree.html and bias.html as a note for posterity.