Seems like you’re looking for anecdotes rather than data which strikes me as strange for a purported rationalist.
There’s a hypothesis in my post and I’m running a cheap experiment to disprove it. Absences of anecdotes would falsify the hypothesis.
If the hypothesis isn’t falsified that would justify running more expensive experiments. Having detailed accounts of side effects in turn allows setting up expensive experiments in a more targeted way.
“Anecodates are not evidence” is a slogan that’s quite fundamentally opposed to what this community that founded on ideas like everything is Bayesian evidence is about.
If it helps,
It doesn’t help for the experiment that I care about, but I’m not going to do anything to supress any data reporting.
There’s a hypothesis in my post and I’m running a cheap experiment to disprove it. Absences of anecdotes would falsify the hypothesis.
If the hypothesis isn’t falsified that would justify running more expensive experiments. Having detailed accounts of side effects in turn allows setting up expensive experiments in a more targeted way.
“Anecodates are not evidence” is a slogan that’s quite fundamentally opposed to what this community that founded on ideas like everything is Bayesian evidence is about.
It doesn’t help for the experiment that I care about, but I’m not going to do anything to supress any data reporting.