[WWLink]

There was also a seemingly endless supply of "good questions" where the answers were never deemed acceptable for some long list of reasons, a new reason added to the list every week.

I think at some point a lot of people got fed up trying to give answers to those "good questions" and just settled on "eat shit" and "get the fuck out of my store!" and "I am tired of your shit and I quit!" (or something along those lines lol)

[fwungy]

They used to have debates about controversial subjects where the two sides would face-off in front of a crowd.

I think if Fauci and someone really smart like Peter Hotesz would have beat anyone the covid skeptics could have put up and established their credibility and authority in the eyes of the general public by not appearing to run.

One thing Steve Jobs did well was take hard questions in public venues. He didn't always make everyone happy but his willingness to stand for his ideas inspired confidence in the Apple community.

Fauci's lack of willingness to face a respectfully adversarial audience or interview really hurt his perception as a leader. It almost certainly cost many lives.

[red-iron-pine]

Jobs was a misanthropist who regularly made coworkers cry, stole their ideas (e.g. Woz and an arcade competition), and was often the target of shareholder revolts or lawsuits (that he usually won).

Fauci attempting that tack would have been disasterous, esp. in the midst of an unknown and (for a while) scary pandemic.

Hell, "be like Jobs" is terrible advice for most businesses, too. Final nail in that coffin was Holmes and Theranos.

[fwungy]

Jobs was no saint for sure, but he did build one of the most distinctive brands of all time and rallied a strong development community. Oftentimes that sort of visionary person can be an a-hole. Linus is known to be somewhat ornery too.

[naravara]

Talented debaters are not necessarily honest or knowledgable in their fields.

In fact, being too honest or too nerdy is often a disadvantage. There’s a reason cases on technical matters in courts still get argued my litigators with subject-matter experts as witnesses, not by the SMEs themselves.

[fwungy]

However they do it, if you look like you're avoiding questions people aren't going to trust you.

[naravara]

JAQing off is a strategy for discrediting expertise by inundating with nonsense questions and accusations disguised as questions. There's no good solution for dealing with bad faith shit-stirring, but dignifying every bit of nonsense with a response isn't going to work.

[fwungy]

I'm not saying you need to let Alex Jones on.

There were people asking questions who were MDs and PhDs with good records that could have been used.

Refusing to take any adversarial questions also leads to discrediting by the public. The refusal by Fauci and Birx to do so almost definitely caused a needless loss of life. Leaders show competence and rise to challenges. When people see that they're willing to follow.