4 ms·
>No part of this engages with my comment. He was contriving to engage with it; you should be less brief/concise with your talk about priors and premises in thi
by ygaf 10y ago
>No part of this engages with my comment.
He was contriving to engage with it; you should be less brief/concise with your talk about priors and premises in this thread.
- tptacek 10y agoIf you understood it as responsive to my comment, can you explain to me how it was? I'd like to understand it better.
- ygaf 10y agoWell, in the absence of your followup post, your second line about priors could just be interpreted as 'redefine merit to include being female'. Of course that isn't what you meant about changing priors, and I'll be honest, I've been drinking but be more user-friendly :)