Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6206751" data-attributes="member: 2067">Check the timestamps, looks like we overlapped (I replied to your post before you edited it). Your more thorough response is likely something I can respond to in more depth. Stay tuned.(one edit later...)This is incorrect. It's probably worth noting that, as an aside, here in the thread, we have anecdotal evidence that this has apparently happened, so apparently people will do that. But that's not my position. Again, my case doesn't involve a predictive element -- it's not about saying what people will do, for the simple reason that there's far too many variables to make a reasonable prediction about the future. This isn't a laboratory, and psychology isn't typically a hard science that makes precise predictions. I don't have magical superpowers of precognition, and nothing that I've said mandates that I must be the first person in history able to correctly foretell the minds of an entire audience. Any characterization of my case as one that involves foretelling the future of a poll or the behavior of people is a mischaracterization. I'm not trying to do the impossible, here. To correct that error, it may be useful to think of the default effect as something that accounts for observed behavior, rather than a method for divining some specific future. The studies I cited show that defaults make a significant difference in how people make decisions (and you can see plenty of evidence from other posters all over this board). They claim that this is one of the conclusions one can draw from their results, and I find the argument compelling. Given that defaults are shown to make a significant difference in how people make decisions, how might this account for some of the comments often seen in threads about D&D monster lore? Your case seems to be "It doesn't, because D&D tells you that you can change anything you want," but because this case presumes that this is somehow materially different for decision-making from being told that you can sign up for organ donation if you want, I disagree. In both situations, the decision-maker is told that they can change the default when they want to, so I don't think that this is a significant difference. The studies say that telling the decision-maker that they can change the default doesn't remove the effect of the default. In fact, that's kind of what they're about -- they primary data points consist of people who are explicitly given the option to change a default, but don't. In no situation are we talking about people NOT given the option to change their default (indeed, organ donation makes it easy to change your default -- literally a little box on your driver's license in most states). The rest of your post seems predicated on the incorrect assumption that I'm predicting what people will do when just given a default (and with conflating rejection of the default with changing that default, but that's for down the road). I'd suggest re-evaluating your idea of what my argument is. If you'd like to engage in the dialogue, I'm open to you re-evaluating what you thought my position was to more accurately reflect the reality of the situation. Upon re-evaluation, what do you find?</blockquote>

Verification