I'm going to waffle a bit and say that it's not technique; it's an effect. Further, it's not always an effect with a reasonable cause. Have a $5 billion exit,

I'm going to waffle a bit and say that it's not technique; it's an effect. Further, it's not always an effect with a reasonable cause. Have a $5 billion exit, for instance, and I will listen in rapt attention to anything you say that's not asinine. Perhaps not if you write it to the public of HN, but in a private conversation? I'd be impressed, flattered, etc., not necessarily because of what was said or how it was said, but because of who said it. There's a reinforcing effect here where the more leeway the listener gives you, the more rhetorical risks you'll feel like you can take. Which brings me to my next point: be less accurate. This is a habit (good? bad?) that hackers can pick up because we deal with computers that do care about accuracy and don't care about rhetorical effect. The harder part here is sacrificing your self-image of someone who doesn't bullshit.