But humans weren’t merely objecting on the grounds that I might not be able to fill the role of the objective enforcer—many are opposed to the idea even if that problem could be solved, and I think it is fair to take that as evidence that such humans don’t actually want to be able to send better signals.
But humans weren’t merely objecting on the grounds that I might not be able to fill the role of the objective enforcer—many are opposed to the idea even if that problem could be solved, and I think it is fair to take that as evidence that such humans don’t actually want to be able to send better signals.
Bad in this respect, certainly, but I don’t know how you decided it’s a good idea to simplistically sort humans into the binary “good/bad” categories.
Bad in this respect, certainly, but I don’t know how you decided it’s a good idea to simplistically sort humans into the binary “good/bad” categories.
I haven’t. I merely translated the thought into the language you tend to use when evaluating a specific behavior. It is the sort of thing that usually helps maintain rapport! ;)
I understand you are simply trying to sympathise in order to satisfy the subgoal of improved rapport, and appreciate this effort, but I don’t believe that I simplistically sort humas into a binary “good/bad” categorisation.
I understand you are simply trying to sympathise in order to satisfy the subgoal of improved rapport, and appreciate this effort, but I don’t believe that I simplistically sort humas into a binary “good/bad” categorisation.
My future voting patterns will hold you to that declaration.
But humans weren’t merely objecting on the grounds that I might not be able to fill the role of the objective enforcer—many are opposed to the idea even if that problem could be solved, and I think it is fair to take that as evidence that such humans don’t actually want to be able to send better signals.
They sound like bad humans.
Bad in this respect, certainly, but I don’t know how you decided it’s a good idea to simplistically sort humans into the binary “good/bad” categories.
I haven’t. I merely translated the thought into the language you tend to use when evaluating a specific behavior. It is the sort of thing that usually helps maintain rapport! ;)
I understand you are simply trying to sympathise in order to satisfy the subgoal of improved rapport, and appreciate this effort, but I don’t believe that I simplistically sort humas into a binary “good/bad” categorisation.
My future voting patterns will hold you to that declaration.