That is hard to say for me! Many of the deep, insightful things you say and that appear to be working and useful for you don't seem to work in my own system. I probably need refutations from folks that use a demonstrably compatible ontology. You could try with a detailed message.
Oh, no! That was not an understanding of how you operate, only a characterization of the observation, which results from projecting your actions on my own surface. I don't yet see WHY you seem to stop and deviate, for which I possibly need a meta-perspective.
-
-
I’m flattered and amused that anyone cares to deconstruct my thinking at all. That kind of attention is generally reserved for the Trumps, Petersons and Einsteins. Now if I could get a dozen more people trying to figure out my 8d chess, things could get very interesting

-
The reason for the lack of interest of the crowds in your mortal toil is that you don't do very interesting things. In your attempts at relevance you seem to limit yourself to what's permissible. Trump and Peterson operate outside of what's permitted (which makes success harder).
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
A simple hypothesis for what you are doing would be that a publicist does not depend on getting things right in the face of the immortals because the immortals are dead and don't buy you lunch. A publicist needs to be tightly constrained to the currently dominant discourse.
-
I do like lunch, and I certainly don’t give a crap about the immortals, so you’re on the right track at least

- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.


