1/ The right time to ask sanity-check questions about node n on a thought trail is when you've already explored tree about n+6 levels deep
Conversation
Replying to
2/ Value of what you find in the (n+1, n+6) exploration depths is what justifies the effort devoted to sanity-checking level n, to derisk
1
1
6
Replying to
3/ However, there is a risk: people at n+1 or beyond levels who don't know you will think you're being naive with your questions
1
1
6
Replying to
4/ People who know you will suspect you of being disingenuous in asking a seemingly unsophisticated basic question, like you're trolling
1
5
Replying to
5/ But it's a good way to filter for people you can truly think well with, because they'll sense where you're going without explicit flags
1
6
Replying to
6/ More sociopathically, it's a good way to filter out people who're stalled at say level n+1 or n+2 by their responses. A shibboleth effect
1
6
Replying to
7/ More sociably, it is improvised dog-whistling to discover others who are also on same trail but also don't want to show their hand yet
1
7
Replying to
8/ This is pure 20-20 hindsight. I defaulted into this mode of interaction, especially in public places like Twitter as a filter strategy
1
5
Replying to
9/ I like to think of it as public-key steganography or something. It's better than walls, moats and explicit/visible filter strategies
1
9
Replying to
Does this level of social experimenting make it difficult to talk to a large number of strangers at one time?
1
Show replies
Replying to
11/ Aside, this is the opposite of fake-it-till-you-make-it. Instead of embellishing reputation to gain learning opps, you tarnish it a bit
2
10
Replying to
12/ Fake-it-after-you-make-it in a sense, to squeeze out fragility in learning
1
6
Show replies

