For instance, someone might believe that sign-up walls make for a bad product for a variety of philosophical reasons, but they justify this decision outwardly by pointing to some data from one product's blog about their A/B test on the subject.
That data is not the reason they decided to ditch sign-up walls. It's just the reason they’re giving to others (and often, themselves) about why they made the decision. This behavior represents a sort of homage to science… while simultaneously violating its core principles.
2-4-6as a positive example and asking someone to find out the rule by providing more examples - almost everyone looks for positive examples confirming their idea (
4-8-12for example), instead of looking for negative examples that could give more info (if
2-4-5is also ok, then it changes what I think about a lot)
I think there's some notetaking/databasing ideology in which any "friction" between your brain and the notebook is viewed as bad. Which imho is a faulty idea: choosing words and structure in order to represent your thoughts is not a chore, it's part of forming the thoughts
— Tom MacWright - https://twitter.com/tmcw/status/1233893351981633536