Street Epistemology - Practice

[RoadRunner79]

I have made threads before, i normally have difficulty with people not being able to discuss, because they start assuming motives.... however for me to start a thread, I would either be repeating a previous post, or calling you out.  So I would prefer if you have something to say, that you make the post.  The thread has veered from that quite a bit since it was posted,

Sorry if this was a diversion. I'm fairly new here, so I'm not sure what the rules are for generating posts and 'calling someone out'. Do you have a recommended place/name for the post?

No worries.  It's more of a preference of mine, to try and keep a linear and systematic progression of thought, and not be bouncing back and forth on multiple subjects within a post.  It's not that it  is a diversion,  I think that this certainly fits within the realm of epistemology, and this thread briefly tracked into that topic.  I offered some objections, and it seemed to be conceded and we move on.  I just don't want to draw away from this other conversations (I hope you don't mind). 

As for a place, I think philosophy is always a good category for this subject, although perhaps depending on your focus math may be an option with the Bayes theorem.  I'll warn you now, I'm not interested in double checking your math.  And for title... it's up to you (I should notice anything related). 

Also note... they do have a rule about calling out someone although I don't know if I'm exactly sure on the details.    I don't think that mentioning someone as a continuation from another thread is a problem such as here.   However for me to start the thread, it would either be me presenting a completely different view as I have in the past,   me trying to preempt what I think you are going to say, or basically saying little and calling you out.  None of these seem particularly appealing to me, so I hope you don't mind.