How do you guys reach a point where you're arguing for less effective science communication? They're summing up values as universally recognized objects. Wow! That sounds like the perfect way to communicate with people.
It's such a no brainer. The "anything but metric" meme turned people into dorks.
What's the point of words like favorable opinion when it results in a 16 point split between a late show comedian and a Nazi conman?
I don't know what opinion means, or what it means for people to state their answer, other than the superficial takeaway that they produced noises xyz when prompted with question 123. And? Is there any solid ground here to build on top of?