Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (15026)	9/26/2002 1:22:15 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

No offense, but in my view scientists should not usually become policy makers. They analyze everything to death and if they don't do that they prostitute their principles. So I'm delighted that you declined. No offense taken, but isn't that overly simplistic. If you are a scientist, therefore, you must analyze everything to death? Goodness, there was a business study some time ago that concluded that it takes 10% of the effort to acquire 90% of the relevant data in making a business decision; the "missing" 10% of the information taking a lot more effort and time. The study also concluded that obtaining that last 10% had no predictable affect on making a correct business decision. I'm quite happy with the 10% effort in making business and political decisions. I leave the additional 90% effort to the academically inclined scientists. You do a good effort, sic, 10%; make your decision and move on. There's too much to do, wasting time gathering those last bits of information that have no appreciable affect in improving your decision "accuracy". Complimenting that approach, you have to recognize when you've made a mistake and correct it. and if they don't do that they prostitute their principles. Are you suggesting that since there are few scientists in politics that there are few compromises of principle?