🚀 go-pugleaf

From Osher Doctorow

Basically, Nonconformists and Individualists (the two very often
overlap) should take the Reader rating system devised by Google and
reverse it.   The fewer stars that a person has, the more his/her
ideas deviate from the average, with a few qualifications and a few
exceptions.

Of course, highly deviant ideas from the average can be either in the
direction of Creative Genius or Utter Mediocrity, assuming that the
average is something like Ingenious Imitation or Borderline
Mediocrity.  So once you've identified the "zero star" people, you
have to select among them for the real Creative Geniuses.

There are arguably some Rules of Thumb.  Preferably, I think, they
should start new fields, like Probable Causation combined with GR and/
or Quantum Theory. or Cosmology.   You have to read their postings to
determine that.   They should have cumulatively at least a large
number of equations and/or inequalities in their postings, which you
can determine by inspection of a given thread, and of those equations
and inequalities, most should be new (which you can ask professors or
consultants or tutors about if your ability to research the field is
low).   If you're really desperate to know which equations or
inequalities are new, you can find lists of physics equations in most
branches of physics on the internet, via textbooks, in journals, etc.

If a Reader goes into somebody else's thread and keeps up a barrage of
hostility, including but not limited to profanity, personal attacks,
one-liners or one-worders, out-of-context remarks without explanation
(like "wrong!" followed by no explanation), then it's very doubtful
that he or she is a Creative Genius regardless of Reader rankings.
Closed minds of the troll or graffiti artists types just don't
characterize the vast majority of Creative Geniuses.

Osher Doctorow