Section 2: This section didn't describe these realities so much as talk about how big data and reality mining are necessary and sufficient to solving all the world's problems - it might be best to temper the rhetoric a little. The tone is too definitive

[h0pbeat]

I have changed the wording in a few places, but in general I do not agree with the editor. Yes, the tone is definitive, but this is because it contains the opinion of Sandy and all of us, rather than being an objective description. I would vote against watering it down. We need strong words here, because it is important. Guys?

[apentland]

agreed, they invited us because we have a view. we need to express the view.

On 12/30/2013 9:56 AM, h0pbeat wrote:

I have changed the wording in a few places, but in general I do not agree with the editor. Yes, the tone is definitive, but this is because it contains the opinion of Sandy and all of us, rather than being an objective description. I would vote against watering it down. We need strong words here, because it is important. Guys?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/eCitizen/chapter/issues/29#issuecomment-31348933.

Prof. Alex `Sandy’ Pentland, http://media.mit.edu/~pentland Director, MIT Human Dynamics Lab http://hd.media.mit.edu Director, MIT Media Lab Entrepreneurship Program Author, Social Physics http://socialphysics.org Videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O22acc48lKo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv5bxqQG5xI Popular Papers: http://bit.ly/1dzhGbA ;Scientific American, Big Data http://hbr.org/2013/11/beyond-the-echo-chamber/ar/1 http://hbr.org/2012/04/the-new-science-of-building-great-teams http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=P4nfoKYAAAAJ

[dazzaji]

This comment irked me a little. The tone may be a little too gentle, under all the circumstances but it is hardly inappropriate or needing corrective editorial action. Adding some more scholarly backup and citation could be constructive, nonetheless.