Cross-posted from @easterncoyote.bsky.social: I'm creating a feed of mutuals who actually interact with me, liking and commenting on my posts. This will be a pain to cultivate, but I believe in reciprocity, so it's worth it.
Three Mutuals feeds in a row won't load. They each have different creators. I like reciprocity, so I'll create a feed of mutuals who actually interact with me, liking and commenting on my posts. Honestly, this will be a pain to cultivate, but I'll be paying attention to the right people.
Matthew Emerton, Robert Pollack, Tom Weston Explicit reciprocity laws and Iwasawa theory for modular forms https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.02013
“Next question Mr Trump. Can you define reciprocity? Also, without the help of notes, can you tell us the date of your daughter Tiffany’s birthday?”
Good morning, Paulette. A bit of reciprocity is sometimes needed too.👋
Of course, no one *wants* reciprocity. That's why we have norms. If people wanted it it would not be norms, it would be desires.
I think most people don't really want reciprocity in argument rules. I'm not sure this is a particular indicator of conspiracy nuts.
I've been meaning to write this up for a while, but once you see this it just becomes blindingly obvious. They lack a sense of reciprocity in argument rules.
A big goal for me as we approach the 9th anniversary of Party of One and head into Year 10 (a surreal number to see) is reciprocity. There are parts of producing the show that at times feel... less like mutually beneficial collaboration and more like unpaid labor. I want to course-correct those.