Thank you for your response. After reading it, I’m much more sympathetic to your cause, and in particular it has caused me to strongly update against the hypothesis that you were speaking in bad faith. I have upvoted accordingly.
(To be clear, this was not my dominant hypothesis at the time I wrote my initial reply to you, but it did possess non-trivial probability mass, and I think it’s safe to say it no longer does.)
Do you mean that you roled back the strong downvote? Or do you mean you upvoted the revelation of the background?
Do you think “inject at least mildly political undertones” took place and do you still think it is epistemically corrosive? Does “inject at least mildly political undertones” impute intention to others?n (I am trying to understand under what theory I did wrong by finding instances of the theory trying to understand what parts of the rule phrase “imputing intention to others where there is none” mean (I am “revealing my game” because I want to emphasise dealing with confusion over demands for consistency))
Thank you for your response. After reading it, I’m much more sympathetic to your cause, and in particular it has caused me to strongly update against the hypothesis that you were speaking in bad faith. I have upvoted accordingly.
(To be clear, this was not my dominant hypothesis at the time I wrote my initial reply to you, but it did possess non-trivial probability mass, and I think it’s safe to say it no longer does.)
Do you mean that you roled back the strong downvote? Or do you mean you upvoted the revelation of the background?
Do you think “inject at least mildly political undertones” took place and do you still think it is epistemically corrosive? Does “inject at least mildly political undertones” impute intention to others?n (I am trying to understand under what theory I did wrong by finding instances of the theory trying to understand what parts of the rule phrase “imputing intention to others where there is none” mean (I am “revealing my game” because I want to emphasise dealing with confusion over demands for consistency))