You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

philh comments on Open Thread, Jun. 22 - Jun. 28, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: Gondolinian 22 June 2015 12:01AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (203)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Jiro 23 June 2015 06:56:16PM 2 points [-]

I correctly guessed what X was. Because there's only one thing it could ever be, unless the paper was talking about very unusual subgroups like Jehovah's Witnesses in Mormon territory.

Comment author: philh 24 June 2015 11:03:04AM *  -1 points [-]

I think that ngurvfgf would have been a plausible X in some places (and perhaps the opposite in others), but the correct one was the first that came to mind and the one I considered most likely.