There’s a deeper problem, how do we know there is a feedback loop?

I’ve never actually seen a worked out proof of well any complex claim on this site using standard logical notation…(beyond pure math and trivial tautologies) 

At most there’s a feedback loop on each other’s hand wavey arguments that are claimed to be proof of this or that. But nobody ever actually delivers the goods so to speak such that they can be verified.

Why would I reply on a public comment how exactly I detected this, assuming you do believe there is in fact some technique? 

Asking me in a public comment to reveal techniques that would obviously help such pretenders evade better in the future is just nonsensical, at least put it in a DM.

And if you don’t believe there is any such technique, why pretend to ask in the first place? 

Of course there could be people that fully read it and didn’t comment? 

It clearly wasn’t meant to exclude every single possible reader on the internet that could have come across it. That would be a crazy interpretation. 

At most, it can be read as calling out every single commentator underneath the post who did pretend to read all of it. And yes it’s clear not every commentator pretended that, so they wouldn’t fall into that category.

Trying to score points in such an obvious way is also pretty deceptive.

The more interesting question is why would anyone ever assume that to be the case, in the first place? 

Unless they’ve literally never encountered a deceptive person in their life, it just seems implausible to not notice this.

This doesn’t make sense as a reply…

How is your opinion on perceived emotional expressiveness even relevant to the prior comment ?

Huh that is a really good point. There are way too many people with US/UK backgrounds to easily differentiate between the expert pretenders and the really substantial experts. It’s even getting harder to do so on LW for many topics as karma becomes less and less meaningful.

And I can’t imagine the secretary general’s office will have that much time to scrutinize each proposed candidate, so it might even be a positive thing overall.