Yet another garoto in Rio murders a client at another Lapa love hotel

[SirBillybob]

[SirBillybob]

Edited June 4, 2023 by SirBillybob

[SirBillybob]

At the risk of duplication, as the OP is thorough, and the drilling down not meant to diminish the poor fella’s untimely end:

Edited June 4, 2023 by SirBillybob

[SouthOfTheBorder]

we all process information differently & all have different levels of risk tolerance.

Information includes our own first-person experience - and I’ve seen way too much in Rio to think crime/danger is simply a “narrative” or wildly overblown press accounts.  If anything - the rampant tourist crime & crime related to sex trade is underreported.  Any frequent visitor Rio knows this is true. 

For all those reasons Rio is permanently off my list when other more safe options are available. 

[SirBillybob]

4 hours ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

we all process information differently & all have different levels of risk tolerance.

Information includes our own first-person experience - and I’ve seen way too much in Rio to think crime/danger is simply a “narrative” or wildly overblown press accounts.  If anything - the rampant tourist crime & crime related to sex trade is underreported.  Any frequent visitor Rio knows this is true. 

For all those reasons Rio is permanently off my list when other more safe options are available. 

Well, truth calls for a liberal sprinkling of grains of iodized salt. And actually most information is processed in similar fashion, albeit a gradient of competence,  across the full human spectrum. Additionally, there would be general commonality as far as capacity for enduring the dark side curves thrown at us, and what would represent a threshold  of unacceptable diminished return. That is partly what makes us human and supports sympatico. 

I would add that I pull the least-squares linear regression to the opposite outlier pole as far as the association between person-days and lived+observed experience of the negatives.

What I don’t quite grasp is the reiterated entry of a decision that seems apparently  aimed at influencing others. Why would one describe a position of finality as if it were to be predictably representative of another visitor’s future city encounter?

I would not consider my particular experience as competitively leaning to an opposite position on a choice binary simply because that experience lacked misfortune and was all good. My experience is not set up as contrarian perceptually or geared to disabuse others of the notion that danger and mishaps are not to be anticipated. That would contain as much a confirmation bias logic fallacy as the antithetical viewpoint.

Rigidified perspectives are not all bad all the time. In an interactive open context they may spur additional content pertinent to the dynamics of perception and debate.

Or, wait, maybe, who am I kidding? 

I can identify one long-list qualifying thought leader in this thread (I don’t get to nom or vote for myself)

Edited June 5, 2023 by SirBillybob

[solacesoul]

4 hours ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

we all process information differently & all have different levels of risk tolerance.

Information includes our own first-person experience - and I’ve seen way too much in Rio to think crime/danger is simply a “narrative” or wildly overblown press accounts.  If anything - the rampant tourist crime & crime related to sex trade is underreported.  Any frequent visitor Rio knows this is true. 

For all those reasons Rio is permanently off my list when other more safe options are available. 

Adult, sentient human beings should be able to gather all forms of information — sometimes this info is competing and contrary, some info will be shiny, happy and positive, and others will be gloomy, dark and negative  — and use all these points of information to make their their own informed decisions.

Anything else ventures dangerously into propaganda territory.

[SouthOfTheBorder]

On 6/5/2023 at 2:13 PM, SirBillybob said:

Well, truth calls for a liberal sprinkling of grains of iodized salt.

what in the pretentious nonsense is this ?

 

[SirBillybob]

2 hours ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

what in the pretentious nonsense is this ?

 

Whatever it is I’ve been tipped off that, in my case, bearing witness to certain certain specious opinions necessitates monitoring for elevated blood pressure risk, but is the solitary precipitant. (no typo)

 

Edited June 6, 2023 by SirBillybob