1/ Only give the conclusion, not the process logic content, which can be blocked

2/ Only give the conclusion, use non-systematic cases as arguments, and block

3/ Ignore the complex system itself, and like to analyze some problems that are so grand that they have no application value. You can block them (eg. Does reading have any meaning for success/making money/investment?)

4/If you like to use authoritative labels such as number of fans, years of experience, titles, historical success data, etc. instead of factual logic to prove that your content is worth reading, you don’t need to read it

5/You don’t have to read any conclusions that predict the future (but the arguments may be valuable)

6/ If one's own position tends to influence the conclusion of the question, considering the underlying pursuit of consistency in human nature, the weight can be reduced or ignored.

7/ If you don’t need to stake for what you say, you can reduce the weight (*staking does not necessarily mean money, personal popularity/time and energy, etc. also count)

8/ If someone says that his previous predictions have successfully hit the current situation, it is recommended to ignore it (because those who have not hit the target will not be brought up, which is silent evidence. Call back 5)

9/ The content of outsiders' comments on what kind of person a celebrity is interspersed in the process of telling historical facts can be ignored

10/Analysis that cannot be tested and falsified can be disbelieved (Popper: The criterion for distinguishing science from non-science - falsifiability)

11/ Proof logic that equates external recognition with correctness can be blocked (eg. Everyone is doing it, which means it is correct.)

12/Only studying the causes of individuals in isolation, ignoring the influence of the relationship between individuals and various factors in the current context, can reduce the weight (eg. Elevator Theory)

13/ There is no necessary relationship between using word count (such as a book of xx million words) to prove content quality and using time to prove output quality. Furthermore, word count is actually the time cost of readers.

14/In order to convince, we forcefully compare different scenarios, focusing only on the similarities and ignoring the differences in important variables, just like transplanting elephant teeth into human mouths. This is actually confirmation bias.

15/It is meaningless to only pursue theoretical optimization without considering the practical difficulty and implementation cost when solving problems. (eg. How to put an elephant in a refrigerator? The answer is three steps in total...)

16/ All relevant information about low-value discussion objects, such as gossip, family matters, and emotions or feelings centered on subjective will, can be blocked

...To be continued