3 ms·
If your 20 friends are all "massive fans" of a given person, I agree, that's a pretty solid indicator of significant bias. Well, maybe not if that person were t
by samhw 5y ago
If your 20 friends are all "massive fans" of a given person, I agree, that's a pretty solid indicator of significant bias. Well, maybe not if that person were the Dalai Lama or something like that, but Thiel is not the Dalai Lama. (Even a regular llama would be strong competition.) I should add that the same would very much apply if all your 20 friends felt the opposite way - that would be closer to the norm, but still implausibly unanimous.
- laingc 5y ago> If your 20 friends are all "massive fans" of a given person, I agree, that's a pretty solid indicator of significant bias. I'm glad you agree. Would you say that the tone of your comment reinforces, diminishes, or is neutral with respect to my comment about starting flame wars?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- samhw 5y agoWell, how do you define a 'flame war'? Specifically, what besides the fact that someone is challenging your view?
- laingc 5y agoWhich of my views are you challenging?
- samhw 5y agoYour approval of Thiel. I agreed with your view that your sample was biased.
- laingc 5y agoYour comment didn’t challenge anything about my approval of Thiel. In fact, your comment didn’t add anything substantive whatsoever apart from a tone of disapproval - hence my question about starting flame wars. Usefully, your comment has demonstrated the exact phenomenon I was referring to.