X-Message-Number: 26851
From: 
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:56:06 EDT

Subject: Re: reputation IS germane.  You really aren't that ignorant,  are you, 
Flav?

In a message dated 8/19/2005 5:00:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
 writes:

"Flavinoid" wrote:

Let's look at it from the other angle.  Is it logically valid to  give any 
more weight to information presented by a "known, reliable  source"?  Well, 
maybe if one is dealing in probabilities, but certainly  not if one is 
dealing in confirming and verifying the validity of  information.  If 
assessing probability, the reputation of the speaker  of the information 
should be given a very low weight if any at  all.



(Rudi Hoffman...my REAL name...responding.)

What the HECK is this guy talking about?!

At the risk of getting mired in a Cryonet flame war, I felt I HAD to  respond 
to the above bit of drivel.  To be fair, the rest of the posting  was a bit 
more rational than the above snippet.  There MAY be some  situations where 

concealing your identity is vital.  But they are certainly  rare, and this forum
ain't one of 'em, baby.
 
"Why Reputation based systems work."
 
We all live in an information glut.  The amount of  filtering of information 
most of do every day is ENORMOUS.  
 
To save valuable and precious time, we use SHORTCUTS.   These are simple and 
usually reliable algorithms of the weight and importance we  ascribe to 
various inputs we are being constantly bombarded with.   

You take the advice of a trusted friend over that of a stranger with a  
vested interest counter to your own. 
 
I am an internet stranger, calling you on a bit of irrationality  that is not 
up to your usual standards, Flavinoid.  But if your boss, or  best friend, or 
spouse, says "Look, man, that is the worst bit of bullshit I  have heard all 
month!" you would probably process this input differently.   BASED ON THE 
SOURCE, YOU MORON!
 
 The SOURCE is the most IMPORTANT part of the message, for  much, probably 
most, of our daily decisions and quality of life choices.
 
As you are reading this, there may be a background cacophony of  tv or radio 
noise.  You are filtering this, to, hopefully, concentrate  on the ASTONISHING 
PROFUNDITY of this idea (facetiousness intended.)
 
It is actually rather obvious, and no doubt others will state  this more 

succinctly than I...although perhaps with not the same verbiage.   I doubt most 
of 
them will be even this nice.
 
REPUTATION is what advertising is about.  We don't have the  TIME, 

TEMPERMENT, or TALENT, (or the desire) to road test every possible  option.  So 
we buy a 
brand name because this brand has a trusted REPUTATION  for quality.
 
I don't have a laboratory to assay every vitamin and nutrient I  take.  So I 
pay a premium for Life Extension Foundation nutrients which  have gained my 
trust.
 
Why do I drive a Lincoln Town Car, not a Chevy Vega?  

Because the Lincoln has a REPUTATION for being a solid, well  built 
automobile that lasts.  
 
Why do you read some books and not others, "Flavinoid"?  Is  it because the 
REPUTATION of the author MATTERS to you?  Is my opinion  about an arcane 

question of nuclear physics as good as any PhD in Physics who  has built a solid
reputation for veracity over 50 years?
 
Of course not.  SOURCE MATTERS!

We ALL rely on the  concept of reputation every day, and most of spend huge 
amounts of time, energy,  and money seeking to develop a good or GREAT 
reputation.
 
If you think you don't, you are either lying to yourself and  others.  Or you 
don't have a reputation that is particularly  desirable.  You may be a great 
guy, but if you got a bad "rep," you may as  well be a total idiot.
 
 
And this obviously implies a premium on personal integrity and  

accountability.  And using one's real name, if you want to be taken  seriously, 
in a forum 
like this.
 
While I don't always agree with Paul and Kitty, I must say the  Kitty posting 
about the negatives of anonomous postings, votings, vettings, and  activity 
of any sort makes TREMENDOUS sense.  
 
Because I don't want a REPUTATION for being long winded, which  would 

encourage you to run for the scroll bar when seeing my postings, I will  close 
now.
 
As always, I could be wrong.  But I don't think so.
 
BTW, Flavinoid, because I don't want a REPUTATION as a name  caller, or even 
a mean guy, I kinda apologize for any excesses in above  posting.  I was 
trying for a certain amount of readability, a trait I prize  highly.
 
For Centuries,  And for Great Reputations, and Individual  Accountability,
 
Rudi Hoffman
 


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26851