It seems clear that #2 is the more interesting of these
It also seems clear that we don't have a good handle on the underlying process so claims about what it does or does not should not be expressed in plain and simple phrases.
I don't think it's usually the best criterion
I didn't say it was -- I said I liked it. Fancier significance tests are fancier, but also easier to trick oneself with.
claims about what it does or does not should not be expressed in plain and simple phrases
It appears that from this you draw the conclusion that any given plain and simple phrase can and should and will be clearly understood to refer to something easier to make such claims about with confidence. I draw a different conclusion: we shouldn't make claims with plain and simple phrases that are liable to be understood in terms of things we don't have a good handle on.
easier to trick oneself with
I am not at all convinced. It is very, very easy to trick ones...
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.
Notes for future OT posters:
1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.
2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)
3. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.
4. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.