Thread by @speakerjohnash

I'm going to be brutally honest

@jim_rutt

You are genuinely dropping the ball by not speaking to me about cognicism

You are holding back the very progress you seek to see by delaying conversation

In 2014 we independently came to the same conclusions as you without ever knowing the terms "game b" or sense-making

We actually built a large part of it. It's on the free tier of aws right now.

You defined a hole in society. You said... look there's a hole it has a particular shape and it is making the substrate of society unstable.

The ideas behind cognicism fit that hole and they were ideated in complete isolation in 2014 from any of your discussions of Game B.

Is that not worth exploration?

If two people invent calculus... don't you want to speak to the other guy who invented a different version of calculus independently?

I'm sitting here going through old videos of all these people presenting the same ideas as we did in 2016.

They're asking "what fits this hole of game b?"

Yet this answer remains unheard

How many people are legitimately suggesting solutions that fit the hole?

What is it that is preventing me from connecting with this Game B in-group you all have created @jim_rutt ?

What identity or credentials do you need to hear before you view me as trustworthy authority on this topic?

Why is it that people have only started to attend to my voice after convincing Jordan Hall to let me interview him about Civium?

Should it not be about the idea and not the people?

If the only way to have our voices on the topic be amplified is to connect with one of you haven't you created a game A dynamic all over again?

I know I'm pretty sassy in this thread, but fuck... do we really have the luxury to wait and work through these in-group dynamics? Why not skip all the bullshit and let's just talk.