If you have to choose between someone who's a jerk in personal matters but perfectly correct in his opinions, and someone who's upstanding in personal matters but heretical in his opinions, choose the latter.
Show this thread
-
I think that might depend on what I'm choosing them for. People who do local damage versus people who do global damage?
That's an interesting point. Maybe in very specific circumstances you'd want a jerk with the right opinions. But I'd be really nervous about that.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Agreed, “jerk” definition can also be vary person to person, culture to culture, etc. Somone within an environment that is volatile can be both beneficial and detrimental based on the environment. It’s not very clean cut.
End of conversation
-
-
-
Bullshit is a subset of aesthetics. Entertainment has value. We love facades for their own sake. Your post is context specific. Sometimes I want the aesthetics over the substance. This is Lindy
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Setting aside decisions which require specific technical expertise, the rule might even work in most “global” circumstances. The problem is one can’t apply it to public figures since you are using an impression created by a curated public persona not their actual comportment.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Dr House possibly being the archetypal "jerk with the right opinions"?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.