Started Nov 10, 2020 10:12PM UTC   •   Closed Jan 15, 2021 05:00PM UTC

How can we all, as forecasters, disagree without being disagreeable?

Listening to unpopular, divergent, and nonconsensus views can be important to accurate forecasting. Think back to the last time you were presented with information with which you disagreed. What made you more likely to consider updating your forecast? What made you less likely? In more general terms, what can be done to promote greater epistemic humility and civil discourse on GJO?

This is a forum for GJO forecasters interested in sharing their thoughts regarding how to best share and listen to unpopular, divergent, opinions. You can also share any ideas which you consider to be constructive towards promoting more civilized and thoughtful conversations about forecasting topics on GJO.

*This is not a forum for talking about any single forecasting question or group of questions as such. 

*This is not a forum to flag any specific comments or user behavior.

The content in this discussion forum is only user-generated. To see Good Judgment Open’s Etiquette policy, please click here. We have also posted a blog post on the importance of civil discourse. For research on the role of forecasting in promoting epistemic humility, please click here.

Remember, forecasting is concerned with what will happen, not what we want to happen.

This question has ended, but is awaiting resolution by an admin.

Possible Answer Crowd Forecast
Tip: Mention someone by typing @username