Interesting opinion but I believe he went with the crowd?
I seek the truth, advocate it and challenge people to prove me wrong. Either way I win.
If no one can prove me wrong, I successfully extracted the essential truth of the matter and wielded it like a finely crafted sword to cut through extraneous untruths.
If I end up being proved wrong, I can reverse engineer my rationale to fathom where my logic pathway went astray then apply that epiphany born by failure to improve my future reasoning.
It really doesn't matter to me where "the troops line up". I generally read the overarching concept. Write my response based on my intellectual investigations then read the responses of my peers throughout the discussion. I do the same thing when I handicap thoroughbred races for race tracks. I don't look at morning line odds someone else generated. I calculate my winners based on my unadulterated perception of them, only when it gets to betting time do I concern myself with odds.
