Look, the problem as I see it is that you can genuinely in your heart of hearts believe this is the Right answer and you can have come to that conclusion independently of making any money off it and the minute you make money, people will piss on the idea that you are suggesting something because you really and truly for realzy realz believe it is the right answer.
This is a thing I am very familiar with. I have a serious health problem. I have gotten myself dramatically healthier when doctors say it cannot be done. It precludes me having a normal job. I do freelance work online and I run a number of websites. I had a health site for years and it really did not make money and I was given absolute hell from all sides for having ads on it or a donate button or affiliate links. I was decried as the devil, endangering people's lives. blah blah blah blah blah and all kinds of other shit. The fact that I actually fucking have this serious condition and actually fucking got myself healthier with the things I was talking about made zero difference. I was (THEORETICALLY but not actually) "making money" for sharing the information, so, clearly, I was a snake oil salesman, trying to get rich off the suffering of other people.
The nanosecond you make a plug nickel off of anything, people will hang you high. I don't care how ethical you are. I don't care how much you really believe in it and have tested it yourself and are the real deal, people will riot in the streets about how the only possible reason you are saying that is to make a buck and not because you genuinely think it is true and thought it was true before there was any money involved.
So I am a tad burnt out on hearing how "If someone is making money on it, they are all liars and con artists and suffer cognitive bias and blah blah blah blah." Those accusations mean that NO ONE can promote anything unless they are martyrs who are getting absolutely nothing out of it at all ever under any circumstances.
I am well aware of cognitive bias and the mental models we don't even know we are operating under. I spent a lot of time in therapy and I still spend a lot of time examining myself and other people around me with an eye towards "actions speak louder than words" -- with an eye towards believing the patterns of behavior I see them engaging in, never mind what they are telling me. But I am the wrong person to have this argument with. I am so incredibly sick of hearing this from people.
Let's say Sam does what the founder of Habitat for Humanity did and gives away all his wealth and goes campaigning for housing solutions in San Francisco and at that point he concludes, based on years of study, that AirBnB is part of the solution and not part of the problem. At that point will you accept that he isn't just "suffering cognitive bias"? Is that what it takes for him to make an argument and not get accused of being specious?
I have news for you, I doubt it. I am HOMELESS. I still have to hear shit from people about being a snake oil salesman and a liar and a teller of tall tales and endless utter and complete shit.
So, sorry, you chose the wrong person to try to make this point to. I just am the wrong person to talk to about this.
Edit: For some reason, your follow up comment to me is dead, so I cannot reply to it directly.
You saying Sam is in a bubble of yes-men carries more weight with me than "Well, money!" But, in essence, attacking Sam and his reasons for saying what he is saying just pisses me off. Attack his argument -- come up with stats about how AirBnB is impacting the SF real estate market and argue whatever it is you think is the truth here. But please don't talk to me about the vested interest he has and how that causes cognitive bias. That is damn close to being a personal attack and it is basically an unfounded bullshit attack because both sides have vested interest or they wouldn't be arguing it. Duh. So what is the fucking point in pointing that out?
Look, the problem as I see it is that you can genuinely in your heart of hearts believe this is the Right answer and you can have come to that conclusion independently of making any money off it and the minute you make money, people will piss on the idea that you are suggesting something because you really and truly for realzy realz believe it is the right answer.
This is a thing I am very familiar with. I have a serious health problem. I have gotten myself dramatically healthier when doctors say it cannot be done. It precludes me having a normal job. I do freelance work online and I run a number of websites. I had a health site for years and it really did not make money and I was given absolute hell from all sides for having ads on it or a donate button or affiliate links. I was decried as the devil, endangering people's lives. blah blah blah blah blah and all kinds of other shit. The fact that I actually fucking have this serious condition and actually fucking got myself healthier with the things I was talking about made zero difference. I was (THEORETICALLY but not actually) "making money" for sharing the information, so, clearly, I was a snake oil salesman, trying to get rich off the suffering of other people.
The nanosecond you make a plug nickel off of anything, people will hang you high. I don't care how ethical you are. I don't care how much you really believe in it and have tested it yourself and are the real deal, people will riot in the streets about how the only possible reason you are saying that is to make a buck and not because you genuinely think it is true and thought it was true before there was any money involved.
So I am a tad burnt out on hearing how "If someone is making money on it, they are all liars and con artists and suffer cognitive bias and blah blah blah blah." Those accusations mean that NO ONE can promote anything unless they are martyrs who are getting absolutely nothing out of it at all ever under any circumstances.
I am well aware of cognitive bias and the mental models we don't even know we are operating under. I spent a lot of time in therapy and I still spend a lot of time examining myself and other people around me with an eye towards "actions speak louder than words" -- with an eye towards believing the patterns of behavior I see them engaging in, never mind what they are telling me. But I am the wrong person to have this argument with. I am so incredibly sick of hearing this from people.
Let's say Sam does what the founder of Habitat for Humanity did and gives away all his wealth and goes campaigning for housing solutions in San Francisco and at that point he concludes, based on years of study, that AirBnB is part of the solution and not part of the problem. At that point will you accept that he isn't just "suffering cognitive bias"? Is that what it takes for him to make an argument and not get accused of being specious?
I have news for you, I doubt it. I am HOMELESS. I still have to hear shit from people about being a snake oil salesman and a liar and a teller of tall tales and endless utter and complete shit.
So, sorry, you chose the wrong person to try to make this point to. I just am the wrong person to talk to about this.
Edit: For some reason, your follow up comment to me is dead, so I cannot reply to it directly.
You saying Sam is in a bubble of yes-men carries more weight with me than "Well, money!" But, in essence, attacking Sam and his reasons for saying what he is saying just pisses me off. Attack his argument -- come up with stats about how AirBnB is impacting the SF real estate market and argue whatever it is you think is the truth here. But please don't talk to me about the vested interest he has and how that causes cognitive bias. That is damn close to being a personal attack and it is basically an unfounded bullshit attack because both sides have vested interest or they wouldn't be arguing it. Duh. So what is the fucking point in pointing that out?