hot take: anon people with “hot takes” are the most beta of beta energy. 

sharing a strong POV takes a lot more courage when there is reputational, social, and financial capital on the line — and rarely is that ever the case when one is anon.

/ted | exploring the onchain frontier | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina

🌶️- if you take a random person, based or not, and you impose the risk of loss of reputational, social, and financial capital...

that's just a more coercible person that will agree with others. especially if they know that the consensus is wrong.

𝖒𝖆𝖓𝖉𝖆𝖙𝖚𝖒 𝖆𝖉 𝖆𝖘𝖙𝖗𝖆

https://historyinsights.com/11-minute-applause/

I think it's not that axiomatic. if we wanted the most objective truth, we'd force the most rigorous dialogue to their logical ends (w/o derailing). a lot of that is automatically churned out when one presents a dilemma of either providing honest feedback as a sacrifice, or staying silent as a way to succeed.

so instead of encouraging people to speak freely and respect them for when they voice a contrarian opinion, you’d rather encourage them to say everything anonymously behind a mask?