Comment by Meredithw20 on New Post version 2 (please read this ONLY if your last name beings with l–z) · 2011-07-28T00:10:04.181Z · LW · GW

The wildly manipulative nature of your methods is, indeed, "appall[ing.]"

It's notable that the impetus for this exercise was a perceived suboptimal situation based on little more evidence than a perceived "spark of intimacy" on the part of your partner, hardly anything falsifiable (and even further, you make no mention of consulting said partner about the seeming negative value judgment inherent in your dismissal of monogamy, which is by no means a given -- that's just bad practice). The discussion that builds the guiding premise for this hoopla is reduced to a fait accompli and not given adequate bearing in a balanced "rational" decision. It seems deceptive not only to your partner, then, but also to your audience to cloak your "rational" endeavors under the guise of maximizing mutual utility when the real compelling interest here is your own, and, I would argue, not the quality of any future relationship(s), but the ease and quantity, rather than quality, of acquaintanceship and sex.

There are also significant issues of rhetoric, particularly with the uses of "own," "data," and "quality," but they hardly seem to carry bearing without significant explanation; this essay contains yawing gaps of information.

Downvote.