The Tang: Trust the process?
In as much as I'm going to leave the word by word, sentence by sentence, thought by thought analysis of your above post to others, I would point out that if one desires to discuss "people defend(ing) their chosen fiefdoms," or "total transparency" or "Conspiracy theorists" or (being)"nefarious" or (being a)"Hypocrite" or "see that very often the data, the interpretation, the methodology, honest mistakes, and more, can make a liar out of some very good people," one has to reconcile with the motivations of one trying to make a point by using 2/3's of their source material from a news outlet that you have said this about Civil Beat or have said this about Civil Beat or have said this about Civil Beat contributors or have said this about Civil Beat. (OK I'll stop)
At any event, I'd suggest that talking about of both sides of your mouth to suit the opinion trying to be conveyed may NOT make the whole discussion "transparent."
In as much as I'm going to leave the word by word, sentence by sentence, thought by thought analysis of your above post to others, I would point out that if one desires to discuss "people defend(ing) their chosen fiefdoms," or "total transparency" or "Conspiracy theorists" or (being)"nefarious" or (being a)"Hypocrite" or "see that very often the data, the interpretation, the methodology, honest mistakes, and more, can make a liar out of some very good people," one has to reconcile with the motivations of one trying to make a point by using 2/3's of their source material from a news outlet that you have said this about Civil Beat or have said this about Civil Beat or have said this about Civil Beat contributors or have said this about Civil Beat. (OK I'll stop)
At any event, I'd suggest that talking about of both sides of your mouth to suit the opinion trying to be conveyed may NOT make the whole discussion "transparent."