Does not an individual who begins a discussion thinking they know what the other person will say start with an almost certain probability of being incorrect? However, if that person begins the discussion while thinking that they know nothing that the other person will say they have an almost certain chance of being correct.
Moral? Be the wise gambler who knows to not ignore the odds. You will lose less frequently or if blessed maybe never lose.
Added to Gab. Aug 7, 2024.
Added to Locals. Aug 7, 2024.
Added to Truth Social. Aug 7, 2024.
Added to Gettr. Aug 7, 2024.
Added to X. Aug 7, 2024.
To turn my leering leaching eye to the realm of "Notes", for example "Community Notes" and all other sources of information sometimes also called data either for or not for "checking" or any other purpose such as research. Can there be identified anything that is useless before one's encounter with such note (source)?
Requisite condition: How would one know for themself?
Do I hear it now? What you say?
Self-assigned complication rating: <1>). Or maybe zero.
Point: Everything old is always new to some or many.
SG - Free Thought - [Locals] - [June 2026]
Gab: June 2, 2026.
GETTR: June 2, 2026.
Locals: June 2, 2026.
Truth Social: June 2, 2026.
X: June 2, 2026.
What I am quite but not completely sure of is that I would support not preventing anyone from not doing what they do not want to do. However, in some situations I would not recommend such behavior.
SG - Free Thought - [Locals] - [June 2026]
Gab: June 2, 2026.
GETTR: June 2, 2026.
Locals: June 2, 2026.
Truth Social: June 2, 2026.
X: June 2, 2026.
