Here's why I not only follow ppl on TW I disagree with, but actually appreciate a lot of them.

Because I don't know everything. Worse: I can't *see* everything. I've got blind spots -- not because I'm flawed (though I am), but because I just can't focus everywhere at once. 1/7

So I relish the opportunity to network with some of these ppl. The trick is not to find the ones who are right, it's finding the ones who aren't lying. Who genuinely try to say true things as well as they're able.

It doesn't matter so much if the information is inaccurate... 2/7

Network logic can handle inaccuracies and still be able to identify patterns and build more-efficient solutions. Network-solving will shunt around inaccuracies and end up providing a solid, best-guess.

But throw in a lie? A false signal? It fucks things up. 3/7

It takes up way more of a network's complexity to shunt around a lie in order to identify problems.

See, a node that's lying is not performing the same general operation as the rest of the network. They (unlike a merely incorrect node) are not trying to solve a problem. 4/7

They are working against the network itself, whether they “think” they are or not.

As a node, it's important for me that I don't do this. So how can I know? I mean, these false signals – these “lies” – don't have to be explicitly malicious. 5/7

A false signal only has to be at cross purposes with the general operation of the network.

Socrates had a pretty good method for doing this. He tried to reduce his own ego (didn't aim to "win" some signal boost) and paid attention to his daemon. That still, small voice. 6/7

So, again, I love some of my follows. They reliably aim for this. I believe I **need** them. Even when they're as wrong as a football bat.

But then, what do I know? I'm just an ignorant-ass redneck what don't be supposed to know better.
/end