@MarkIngraham I updated the description. Please let me know if this is counter to your interpretation from your previous trade and I will compensate you with a Manna link in the comments.

I've never seen you cite anything or state any opinions, but your questions are good.

@DuDusus There is a market that I have been blocked from regarding COVID19 origins which prompted this criticism. I harbor no ill will toward anyone involved in that discussion. This is a sincere effort to ensure that I do better, since a lot of what I actually do is look at various kinds of studies, particularly in the AI space, but I'm also not nor have I ever been an academic.

@PatrickDelaney https://manifold.markets/IsaacKing/did-covid19-come-from-a-laboratory

@PatrickDelaney not being an academic makes you more likely to be correct

@RueEjejwu I am hesitant to respond because looking through your comments, I can see that I vehemently disagree with you on certain topics. At the same time, even saying that runs the risk of you buying negative shares in my markets (which is OK and fair for you to do).

Typically if I feed my statement into ChatGPT and ask it to re-write it in a way that doesn't rub people the wrong way it spits out and recommends a nothing-statement, saying that I should say something like:

"It's important to understand that not being an academic may make you correct on certain topics, but of course it's up to interpretation, and there are many different perspectives and it's important for us to all explore different ways people could be correct or not correct."

But at the same time, I might just really think you're wrong. But I'm not sure how to say that in a way that's just, "gamifying," comments and being fake. Maybe I need to create another market on whether I actively try to gamify comments rather than saying what I really think.

I wrote an article about this: https://patdel.substack.com/p/it-was-good-talking-to-you-as-always