Tip that seems bad

I think a major problem is not expecting to get things right.

One way I could address that would be to only post things I’d be surprised to be wrong about.

I am worried if I adopt that policy I won’t post much and/or what I do post won’t be interesting.

The thing you’re imagining doing is not the thing CF advocates. You have not learned the CF idea. The CF non-overreaching method is capable of dealing with any topic.

You have assumed, without asking, and contrary to dozens of things I’ve said, that I’ve accepted a compromise with major negatives and told people to do that despite the negatives. (This undermines CF.)

You don’t know how many errors you make. You made 3+ here but (implied that you) incorrectly believe everything is fixed after you found out about one.

You can’t manage your error rate, and know when branching is exponential (2^n or worse), when you don’t have even a ballpark idea of how many errors you’re making. You also can’t test out error reduction strategies with no meaningful data or metrics about how many errors you make. It’s an ongoing problem that I don’t think you appreciate or are trying to address.

I think the value of CF is an important topic. But I also find it hard to write about because of my unresolved issues with automated social climbing and other errors. My conscious intent is not to harm CF and I’m sorry if what I write comes across that way.

I think I’m alienated from the systematic study of anything, not just CF. I haven’t studied much of significance in a serious planned way since school. What I have learned since school, I mostly got by doing things like tinkering / experimenting, reading articles or watching videos of varying quality that catch and hold my attention, watching what other people do and what results they get, and participating more or less casually in seminars, forums, and ad hoc discussions. I have read some books since school, but none in very close detail or where I took steps beyond just reading to make sure I was learning the material.

I also think I’m more alienated from philosophy than other subjects. It’s not like I’m making significant efforts or really any efforts at all to learn Objectivism, or Critical Rationalism, or some other philosophy while neglecting CF.

I think I did imply that I don’t value CF stuff highly enough to take systematic steps to learn it. I didn’t consciously intend that implication but I think it is correct. However if I implied I think CF stuff is lower value than other philosophical subjects I don’t think that’s correct.

I do think being unwilling to systematically study CF and other subjects is a problem. I’ve been thinking about it and treating it as a small and non-urgent problem though. I realize that is, itself, a disagreement with ET/CF. I can comment about it some but as a caveat I strongly doubt I’ll pursue the disagreement to resolution.

I think at least one factor in how big a problem it seems to me depends on the value of my ongoing participation in CF. I think my lack of systematic study would seem like a bigger / more urgent problem to me if it was so bad that it’d be better (higher value) for me not to participate in CF at all rather than continuing to participate casually. A reason I can guess for that beyond general loss aversion is that I value the idea that someday I might take CF seriously significantly more than I value taking it seriously right now.