I know what your 3rd and 4th guesses were:

Wordle 1,579 5/6

🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜
🟩🟨⬜⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

Was your third word drift?

Lucky:

Wordle 1,469 2/6

⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

Anyway, thanks for continuing to raise important issues!

I would never block you or Joe Bak-Coleman, because I am fine with (and even appreciate) being challenged. For me, blocking is only for people who are very disruptive or insulting. Not just because someone politely disagreed.

I basically agree, I guess, but I also think it's poor epistemics to block someone when the apparent reason is "they made an argument that I find inconvenient to answer." I hadn't said anything remotely disrespectful to him at that point.

PS: you're definitely debating (disagreeing) with me! :)

you're debating right now! :)

anyway, the only bad faith I see is the refusal to address an obvious counterpoint: are all people who work on a problem (reproducibility, anti-Semitism) to blame when a malignant politician weaponizes that issue? if not, why not?

When we funded Prasad, he was working on medical reversals and was writing stuff like this: www.statnews.com/2016/05/09/m...

I can't control what someone does 8-10 years in the future.

*who's

Thanks for the plug, I guess!

"so many"? I can think of arguably 2 people who might be what you're describing.

Good point. In fact, one might as well denounce anyone who has ever criticized anti-Semitism because they are somehow responsible for Trump weaponizing that idea against Columbia and Harvard.

And how does each red light have a different area in which other lights could occur? The size of stoplights isn't standard any more?

How do these red lights make any sense? No source of support, no reason to exist in the first place, no reason to have multiple red lights.

Nothing about that makes sense.

But why are workers staying motionless the while time, and why are there red lights hanging in mid-air with no apparent support or reason for being there?

* several stoplights hanging in mid-air for no reason