WhyAsk
-28
81
WhyAsk has not written any posts yet.
Thanks, I bookmarked that, and will be more specific.
Don't quit your day job.
Welcome back.
Can you be specific, without paraphrasing? And no ad hominem, please.
At this point you might as well let the cat all the way out of the bag, if there is a cat to be let out.
Am I in physical danger? If yes, from whom?
BTW, this is about the strangest thread I've ever participated in. I guess it's an opportunity to learn, which is what I hope I'm doing on this forum.
We've gotten derailed.
All we need do is ask O. Wilde what his or her intentions were in those posts.
Note to readers: I never said it was hypothetical.
And, the textbooks written about my personality type say I have a sensitivity to other people's issues.
And, I'm not starting from zero; over the years I've had office mates and others who acted in a similar way and so I know what works.
Strangely, some of these people may actually have wanted my approval or recognition. Very few get that, even those who are well-behaved. I think I know what causes this, but that info is classified - sorry.
They may have spotted ways that we two are similar. Of course, the idea that I am similar to... (read more)
Analysis of a mind game.
Any comments as to the internal workings of A and B are welcome.
Note that, in the US, a person has the right to confront his/her accuser. In the exchange below, B has done that but the specific accusation has never been clarified by A. Very tricky. I have definitely learned from this exchange.
B: ". . .women are biologically superior. . ."
A: This says far more about you than you could possibly imagine. I suggest being more cautious going forward.
... (read more)At this point it is not clear how exactly B can guard against whatever beliefs he holds that are dangerous. In
It's not your call.
Who are you?
It says that I take for fact what people say who study this type of thing.
I suggest that your conduct in this post is offensive.
Let's say I make six predictions or statements that I believe to be true about someone I've never met and I say the statements taken as a whole are true with P = 0.7. Note that I do not claim to be psychic.
The P of each statement must then lie between 0.7 and 1.0, and if they are equal then the P of each statement is 0.7 ^ (1/6) = 0.94. Let's say 0.9 because I doubt any statement about this type of probability should be reported with two significant figures, and perhaps even one significant figure without an attached tolerance band is a bit of a stretch.
I'd say that a P this high for each statement, given this example, is well nigh impossible.
Agreed?
Maybe I'm not so underqualified as to be unable to enjoy this forum.