On #2, see if he'd used any citations, it might have worked. Without, it doesn't come across as valid. #3 I wish I was exaggerating. Nope. He didn't distinguish between heart and brain. Just "thoughts" vs "emotions" as if they are that cut and dry. #4 exactly. Plus, there's multiple kinds of meditation, not just one. Passing them all off as "relaxation" is not even close. #1 lol.
Wellllll....I think you are right. Especially "When I write, I spend a lot of time fact-checking and citing sources. I always thought credibility mattered. I believed credibility and trust went hand in hand." :)
This morning I read an essay bemoaning the fact that the standards for appearing in public, particularly at special events, has slipped. One guy responded by ordering the author not to be judgmental and to keep her nose out of other people’s business. He also said she didn’t sound like someone he’d enjoy spending time with, which sounds pretty judgmental to me. Who cares, anyway? Medium isn’t a dating app, dude. Get over yourself!
I love this so much! Over the past month or so I have very consciously stopped clicking on headlines that are clearly trying to cash in on someone else's name, feel like click-bait, or just feel desperately gimmicky. This is a bit sideways of the point you are making but feels related in that they speak to quality and accuracy.
Right? That's what it is. I think the bigger the following, the more we should focus on accuracy and facts, not less. It seems irresponsible to me. But what do I know, I don't breathe that rarified air at the top. lol
You would think that knowing you have a large following would be even more reason to make sure your work is accurate and of a high quality. Sure, I imagine there is also more pressure, but accuracy and quality should be a price you pay for the privilege of having that audience. As you said about yourself, I also do not know from a personal perspective. I hope if I turn into a jerk once I have a large following, someone has the good judgment to knock some sense into me. :)
You would think, right? Well if you ever act that way, I'll knock some sense into you with the stack of books I recommended to you. As long as you do the same in return. lol
Why bother to fact-check? If a former president receives cheers (and cash via donations for his PAC) for whatever nonsense comes out of his mouth, then he’s someone to emulate.
Am I wrong? That’s the “thinking” some ppl engage in these days. It’s the ‘any thing goes,’ transactional mentality that No. 45 modeled for ppl whose moral compass wasn’t very well calibrated by their family of origin.
I’ve concluded that sociopathy can be contagious when you’ve aligned yourself with the likes of DJT. Look at what has happened in our nation since he was elected in November, 2016. It’s not pretty…
On a more positive note, I look forward to your weekly newsletter each Friday as an FYI because there’s way too much litter coming into my Medium feed on a daily basis. Thanks for the research you do AND for having a functional, moral compass. BRAVA.
God, Linda, you said a mouthful. I think those people were always there, DT just empowered them. In a bizarre way, the "big" writers on Medium do the same. New writers see what's working for the top writers and emulate. Also -- last paragraph, thank you very much. That means a lot coming from you.
Thanks Linda for your credibility to write about current unsubstantiated information.
I learned valuable lessons on building my voice of experience by listening to problems and researching practical solutions.
Writings, presentations, and face-to-face negotiations on a project site were mutually beneficial when respect and credibility laid the foundation for trust.
That's it exactly, Tom. Respect and credibility are the foundations of trust. I'm not sure everyone agrees, because some people seem to hand out trust based on following size, but the comment here show that many others care about it, too.
The vast majority of people (which includes me) have two standards of evidence/credibility: can I believe this? and must I believe this?
If someone says something I already believe, or want to believe, then I'm going to appreciate it even if they don't do all the fact-checking/credibility/citing-sources stuff. They would have to go off the rails for me to unappreciate them -> in other words, their credibility would have to be so terrible I'd be embarrassed to believe them.
If someone says something I don't believe, or don't want to believe, they I'm going to go through it with a fine-tooth comb (or a sledgehammer) for any flaw in the argument. The bar is high for it to become 'I must believe this even though I don't want to.'
The audience cheers and comes back for more because these people are saying what the audience wants to hear -> confirmation bias for the win.
I see comments like this, where some reader feels oblige to use an insult, and I wonder what's the difference between him and me. We both contribute to the revenues of a platform and we both help to keep it going. He might be more effective at it, though.
He might be. But he might not, too. Some people bring readers to the platform, while others don't. I mean, we all pay our 5 bucks, but beyond that, the people who contribute most are the ones who bring in new readers.
On #2, see if he'd used any citations, it might have worked. Without, it doesn't come across as valid. #3 I wish I was exaggerating. Nope. He didn't distinguish between heart and brain. Just "thoughts" vs "emotions" as if they are that cut and dry. #4 exactly. Plus, there's multiple kinds of meditation, not just one. Passing them all off as "relaxation" is not even close. #1 lol.
Wellllll....I think you are right. Especially "When I write, I spend a lot of time fact-checking and citing sources. I always thought credibility mattered. I believed credibility and trust went hand in hand." :)
You'd never know it to look at the top writers, Henya. lol. But thank you.
Lmao 🤣🤣 so true!
This morning I read an essay bemoaning the fact that the standards for appearing in public, particularly at special events, has slipped. One guy responded by ordering the author not to be judgmental and to keep her nose out of other people’s business. He also said she didn’t sound like someone he’d enjoy spending time with, which sounds pretty judgmental to me. Who cares, anyway? Medium isn’t a dating app, dude. Get over yourself!
God, right? Last sentence made me laugh. Yeah, that says it.
I love this so much! Over the past month or so I have very consciously stopped clicking on headlines that are clearly trying to cash in on someone else's name, feel like click-bait, or just feel desperately gimmicky. This is a bit sideways of the point you are making but feels related in that they speak to quality and accuracy.
Right? That's what it is. I think the bigger the following, the more we should focus on accuracy and facts, not less. It seems irresponsible to me. But what do I know, I don't breathe that rarified air at the top. lol
You would think that knowing you have a large following would be even more reason to make sure your work is accurate and of a high quality. Sure, I imagine there is also more pressure, but accuracy and quality should be a price you pay for the privilege of having that audience. As you said about yourself, I also do not know from a personal perspective. I hope if I turn into a jerk once I have a large following, someone has the good judgment to knock some sense into me. :)
You would think, right? Well if you ever act that way, I'll knock some sense into you with the stack of books I recommended to you. As long as you do the same in return. lol
Why bother to fact-check? If a former president receives cheers (and cash via donations for his PAC) for whatever nonsense comes out of his mouth, then he’s someone to emulate.
Am I wrong? That’s the “thinking” some ppl engage in these days. It’s the ‘any thing goes,’ transactional mentality that No. 45 modeled for ppl whose moral compass wasn’t very well calibrated by their family of origin.
I’ve concluded that sociopathy can be contagious when you’ve aligned yourself with the likes of DJT. Look at what has happened in our nation since he was elected in November, 2016. It’s not pretty…
On a more positive note, I look forward to your weekly newsletter each Friday as an FYI because there’s way too much litter coming into my Medium feed on a daily basis. Thanks for the research you do AND for having a functional, moral compass. BRAVA.
God, Linda, you said a mouthful. I think those people were always there, DT just empowered them. In a bizarre way, the "big" writers on Medium do the same. New writers see what's working for the top writers and emulate. Also -- last paragraph, thank you very much. That means a lot coming from you.
Thanks Linda for your credibility to write about current unsubstantiated information.
I learned valuable lessons on building my voice of experience by listening to problems and researching practical solutions.
Writings, presentations, and face-to-face negotiations on a project site were mutually beneficial when respect and credibility laid the foundation for trust.
That's it exactly, Tom. Respect and credibility are the foundations of trust. I'm not sure everyone agrees, because some people seem to hand out trust based on following size, but the comment here show that many others care about it, too.
Linda, this is the old misconception of value as quantity. Quality is when others chose to collaborate with us to share the value of knowledge.
Well said, Tom. :)
Thank you
Two words --
integrity & morality.
They are severely lacking or hiding these days everywhere, online or not.
I’m so glad you wrote this today.
Supported me to keep fighting the good fight & listen to integrity , even if no one seems to see it.
❤️
Thanks, Yan. What I'm seeing in the comments is that there ARE people who care about that. If nothing else, that was really good to see.
Confirmation bias.
The vast majority of people (which includes me) have two standards of evidence/credibility: can I believe this? and must I believe this?
If someone says something I already believe, or want to believe, then I'm going to appreciate it even if they don't do all the fact-checking/credibility/citing-sources stuff. They would have to go off the rails for me to unappreciate them -> in other words, their credibility would have to be so terrible I'd be embarrassed to believe them.
If someone says something I don't believe, or don't want to believe, they I'm going to go through it with a fine-tooth comb (or a sledgehammer) for any flaw in the argument. The bar is high for it to become 'I must believe this even though I don't want to.'
The audience cheers and comes back for more because these people are saying what the audience wants to hear -> confirmation bias for the win.
Excellent, excellent point, Sara. So basically, they are just preaching to the choir.
I see comments like this, where some reader feels oblige to use an insult, and I wonder what's the difference between him and me. We both contribute to the revenues of a platform and we both help to keep it going. He might be more effective at it, though.
He might be. But he might not, too. Some people bring readers to the platform, while others don't. I mean, we all pay our 5 bucks, but beyond that, the people who contribute most are the ones who bring in new readers.
You've got a deal! :)