I've always figured I was about 60% wrong about things, and maybe 40% right if I was lucky.

This led me to a few conclusions:

First, I should try to make the 40% of the time I was right be darn good.

Second, I should try to reduce the percentage of wrongness through incremental improvements, not unlike the typical Microsoft product.

Third, I should be humble in debates with people and always keep things civil and open-minded, as my personal statistics indicated they had a better than average chance of being the ones in the right.

Fourth, I should try to do research and argue from actual facts as often as possible, since on my own my track record wasn't so great.

Fifth, I should be willing and happy to change my mind when I am proven wrong.

Well, those have been the goals...so how have I done?

I can't complain about my life too much (except, you know, when it involves Guitar Boy, who is going at it this moment), so I'm gonna say my 40% rightness has gotten me pretty far.

For better or worse, I have a strong track record of shoving things out there and incrementally improving them, even if that has proved annoying for some of the recipients being incrementalled on. I usually start without a clear idea of where I'm going or how to get there, but I eventually do get there and sometimes with some flair.

That brings us to humble and open-minded argument. Um...hey, look, a bird! Well, my main pride there is that I have never that I can recall descended into ad hominem attacks or profanity-laced disagreement. I have been the recipient of such blasts, and when the argument reaches that point, I choose to leave the argument. Life is too short and it's not worth it.

However, I am guilty of descending into a bit of snarkiness, and of not always treating arguments with due respect. When I should be taking someone seriously and trying to discuss things in a way designed to really change their mind or my mind and not drop into the usual online bash-fest, I all too often go the wrong way. It's a tough one. And one I need to continually improve on.

As for doing research and arguing from facts...hmm. I'm not very smart when it comes to remembering pesky things like "facts". When lots of dates and acronyms and calculations start flying, my brain does a Homer and ups and leaves me to fend for myself. So I end up arguing from half-remembered stuff I've read or seen here or there, but which I can't necessarily refer back to and am probably mis-remembering in some fashion. My best option has tended to be to find people whose logical approach to problems makes sense to me, and then listen to them. But if discussion of especially hot button topics is ever going to be elevated beyond "It is so! It is not!", then I think it's my obligation to actually get down to some facts and do some processing. Unfortunately, this takes time and energy, so often I just avoid getting into the discussions. Another area for me to improve on.

That leaves a willingness to change my mind. In the long-term I've got this one covered cold. In my life I've gone from a religious ultra-liberal knee-jerk environmentalist to an atheist something-not-all-liberal-but-still-working-that-out skeptical environmentalist.

In the short-term, though, I begrudgingly do the mind-changing thing. I get there when it needs to be done, but not fast enough or with enough grace. I have a great respect for those who can clearly look back and say, "Boy was I an idiot there!"

So what's this all about? Some mental housecleaning, I suppose, combined with a belated New Year's resolution:

This year I resolve to continue to be frequently wrong, sometimes right, and always trying to elevate the level of the discussion in the process.