> There is an old finding in political science that Americans are “symbolically conservative” but “operationally liberal.” Americans talk like conservatives but want to be governed like liberals. In California, the same split political personality exists, but in reverse: We’re often symbolically liberal, but operationally conservative. Renaming closed schools is an almost novelistically on-point example, but it is not the most consequential.
> actively recruiting liberals and moderates, to build a "big tent" of diverse opinions and perspectives
I wonder what the selling point is?
On the Parler "Values" page I see this:
"Regardless of race, sex, age, sexual preference, religion, politics, or dietary choices —- well , except pineapple pizza -- every user is treated equally under Parler’s Community Guidelines."
Using the phrase "sexual preference" speaks volumes. Not in a good way.
While I can see the attempt at humor ("dietary choices"), adding it to this list has at least two problems from my perspective:
- undermines the seriousness of the other categories
- makes fun of what for many is a consequence of their religious beliefs (which appears earlier in the list)
> "Do moderate.... nonsensical posts".
I don't know whether this is the Parler position, or yours, but this is going to upset a lot of people.
Off the cuff, a better user experience altogether might be to prompt attendees afterwards to submit their biggest take-away, instead of a patronizing poke.
That way, not only does it confirm paying attention, but you can also get a signal of course effectiveness.
I've also wondered about the end game and so far concluded that most societies (including the US) would go the vaccine route (which confers herd immunity) as opposed to natural immunity (what I think you mean by "herd immunity"), but I would love to hear what you think.
The reason why I doubt the end game is herd immunity via natural infection is:
* millions would die
* health systems would get crushed
* the virus is unlikely to disappear entirely, so would simmer around the world, triggering epidemics every few years or so.
I often come across developers who only think to use data structures that are native to their language (a Sapir-Whorf trap, if you will).
For example, in JavaScript, we essentially have arrays (great for tracking order, O(n) lookup) and objects (great for O(1) lookup, no order), but that doesn't mean you can't:
a) implement other data structures such as doubly linked lists, heaps, red black trees, etc.
b) combine the strengths of two different data structures in a new object
I think it was Bill Gates who emphasized the importance of picking good data structures up front.
It is also useful to have some heuristic for picking data structures, and I have found the recipe proposed by Gayle Laakmann in her book, Cracking the Coding Interview, useful in most non-esoteric cases.
The compiler complained: “error[E0308]: mismatched types”