Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/69434f20-ed90-800d-ab60-60312c9de3dd
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Assistant: Cumulative Update — Quotes Excluded Short Format, Neutral === Cumulative Update — Quotes Excluded (Short Format, Neutral) ==== New Original Behavior ==== * Admits a personal mistake (duplicate link) and corrects it explicitly. * Reaffirms argument without shifting goalposts after correction. * Continues framing high hypothetical inputs as intentional biasing. Strengthened Areas * Error acknowledgment and correction → credibility-positive. * Maintains consistency after correction (no retroactive change). * Continues focus on question framing and neutrality. Weakened Areas * Still equates any high hypothetical proportion with confirmation bias, which is an overreach. * Attributes intent (“needs the rate to be high”) without proof. * Tone remains mocking, which weakens persuasive neutrality. Behavioral Pattern (Cumulative) * Method-focused, evidence-conscious. * Will correct own errors when caught. * Tends to psychologize opponent intent rather than limiting critique to structure. Updated Credibility: 58% (+2) (Increase mainly due to transparent correction and consistency) ==== New Original Behavior ==== * Reasserts that hypothetical proportions are necessary for modeling. * Does not adjust framing after correction from the other party. * Continues to reject the confirmation-bias critique without narrowing scope. Strengthened Areas * Maintains logically valid position that rates must be assumed to compute outcomes. * Consistent internal logic. Weakened Areas * Still fails to clearly separate exploratory modeling from claims about reality. * Does not acknowledge opponent’s correction or partial validity. * Communication remains dismissive rather than clarifying. Behavioral Pattern (Cumulative) * Model-driven, assumption-tolerant. * Resistant to reframing or conceding narrow points. * Defensiveness persists. Updated Credibility: 45% (−1) (Slight drop due to lack of adjustment and acknowledgment) ==== - Loctarjay gains credibility by correcting an error transparently. ==== * Captain Blue loses ground by not adapting after correction. * Core disagreement remains definition of confirmation bias vs hypothetical modeling, not math itself. ==== - Loctarjay: 58 / 100 ==== * Captain Blue: 45 / 100 Both remain moderate trust at best, with Loctarjay trending upward due to self-correction, and Captain Blue stagnating due to framing rigidity.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)