The Github thing is a very minor issue, but it seems to have instigated a more general discussion. I think you will gain a lot from reading Carnegie. I empathiz

The Github thing is a very minor issue, but it seems to have instigated a more general discussion. I think you will gain a lot from reading Carnegie. I empathize with your struggle; I used to think the same way as you, but now I have come to appreciate that influence is a dance of psychology, anthropology, economics, politics, and specific field knowledge. Correcting even the most blatantly wrong things in anything requires that you get right all the social forces around it. This has always been the case, but for whatever reason, some of us get the wrong mental model growing up - that pointing out the answer could affect change. The more you care that the other side gives up their own facts to accept yours, the less effective your stance will be, no matter how nondisputable the facts. It is much better to act amnesiac and give people wiggle room so they don't feel bad about adopting a new point of view and fear being inconsistent with their past point of view. Correcting someone always implies they were wrong, not something to be reminded of.