[sillysaurus3]

It may be worth examining that tendency. I elected to take the Kolmogorov option: https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376

The question of whether or not your arguments have merit won’t even get entered upon, nor will the authority ever be able to repeat back your arguments in a form you’d recognize—for even repeating the arguments correctly could invite accusations of secretly agreeing with them. Instead, the sole subject of interest will be you: who you think you are, what your motivations were to utter something so divisive and hateful.

Suffice to say, it wasn't too smart to even broach the topic. It derailed the conversation, for one. For two, it didn't lead anywhere productive.

[nkurz]

Personally, I appreciate your efforts at discussing sensitive topics. I encourage you to keep doing so, as honestly but sensitively as you can. While the "Kolmogorov option" might maximize your personal outcome, this doesn't mean it's best for the group to encourage you to take it. You probably already read the recent discussion by another Scott A? https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-...