This is a link post.

One of the very admirable things about the LessWrong community is their willingness to take arguments very seriously, regardless of who put that argument forward. In many circumstances, this is an excellent discipline!

But if you're acting as a manager (or a voter), you often need to consider not just arguments, but also practical proposals made by specific agents:

Should X be allowed to pursue project Y?
Should I make decisions based on X claiming Z, when I cannot verify Z myself?

One key difference is that these are not abstract arguments. They're practical proposals involving some specific entity X. And in cases like this, the credibility of X becomes relevant: Will X pursue project Y honestly and effectively? Is X likely to make accurate statements about Z?

And in these cases, ignoring the known truthfulness of X can be a mistake.

My thinking on this matter was influenced by a classic 2004 post by Dan Davies, The D-Squared Digest One Minute MBA – Avoiding Projects Pursued By Morons 101:

Anyway, the secret to every analysis I’ve ever done of contemporary politics has been, more or [...]

---

First published:
February 28th, 2026

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cXDY9XBm5Wxzort29/fibbers-forecasts-are-worthless-the-d-squared-digest-one

Linkpost URL:
https://dsquareddigest.wordpress.com/2004/05/27/108573518762776451/

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

[Linkpost] ”“Fibbers’ forecasts are worthless” (The D-Squared Digest One Minute MBA – Avoiding Projects Pursued By Morons 101)” by Random Developer

LessWrong (30+ Karma)