4 ms·

> I don't see how a random blogger is more plausible than pg and Airbnb? Yeah, that's status thinking and antithetical to rational discourse. You evaluate a s

by HSO 15y ago

> I don't see how a random blogger is more plausible than pg and Airbnb? Yeah, that's status thinking and antithetical to rational discourse. You evaluate a story or its plausibility on _its_ merits, not on the status of who tells it (unless you have _real_ information about the author's credibility, which in this case neither of us, correct me if I'm wrong, have.) > this seems to corroborate pg's statement, they offered her financial support No, it doesn't. There's a difference between "offering" support and giving it. What EJ said in her follow-up post is that although she was initially offered full support, none of it has actually materialized in the weeks after. > But I'm still inclined to believe pg would not spread disinformation; why should he? I think the man is much smarter than you're giving him credit for... Maybe you should get your nose out of pg's behind and realize that pg too puts his shoes on one at a time and shits like you and me. Having psychological, reputational, and financial stakes in one party of a dispute can induce biases. What I mean is, even good and smart people can fuck up, even with the best intentions. AFAIC, his story gets weighed on the same scale as everyone else's.

YuriNiyazov 15y ago
> Yeah, that's status thinking and antithetical to rational discourse. You evaluate a story or its plausibility on _its_ merits, not on the status of who tells it (unless you have _real_ information about the author's credibility, which in this case neither of us, correct me if I'm wrong, have.) What about in the other direction? I have no information about the author's credibility whatsoever, but from personal interaction I have ample information about PG's credibility.
- danso 15y ago
  That's still argument from authority, like saying "Colin Powell is known to be a highly educated man and honored soldier, how could he be possibly fooled by faked documents?" there is the possibility that the anonymous blogger has just as much integrity and honesty as pg. We don't know whether or not she does. We do know what both parties have said in public. therefore, we need to limit our evaluations to that until further information is known.

by HSO 15y ago

YuriNiyazov 15y ago

> Yeah, that's status thinking and antithetical to rational discourse. You evaluate a story or its plausibility on _its_ merits, not on the status of who tells it (unless you have _real_ information about the author's credibility, which in this case neither of us, correct me if I'm wrong, have.) What about in the other direction? I have no information about the author's credibility whatsoever, but from personal interaction I have ample information about PG's credibility.

danso 15y ago
That's still argument from authority, like saying "Colin Powell is known to be a highly educated man and honored soldier, how could he be possibly fooled by faked documents?" there is the possibility that the anonymous blogger has just as much integrity and honesty as pg. We don't know whether or not she does. We do know what both parties have said in public. therefore, we need to limit our evaluations to that until further information is known.