I really enjoyed reading this article. I will however point out one of the difficulties that arises when you try to implement this 'threshold'. For one thing, t

I really enjoyed reading this article. I will however point out one of the difficulties that arises when you try to implement this 'threshold'. For one thing, the scale that you measure over is often not as constrained and clear as in the cancer case (for example). What is considered 0 and 100 by some body of people could very easily be just 25 to 75 on another scale, or absolutely beyond the pale of another group's scale of thinking. And it's not always easy to spot when things like this happen. Often the issue is that when you have different groups with different conceptions of what this scale entails, that is when you have hilariously "bad" interactions, and can result in ridiculous drives to the extremes of the "platonic" scale. Another common pitfall (I think anyways) is that some of these drives to extremes are driven at least partly out of a sense of the current 'threshold' being placed far too far away from where they 'should' be. Large disparities create large pressures. Coupled with wanting to see things change soon (obviously), and that people have an intuitive motion that if you try to push against something to reach X, you'll probably end up with X-1 or something, you can at least kind of understand some of the drive to extremes.