My default assumption is that this is a shit argument and the people who push it are dishonest fools. There is no (2). There is no second part to this stance, you haven’t presented any evidence yet and you’re posturing as if it’s 100% true.
Even the lowest claim acceptance rates were passing people at 67% according to data. Average was more like 84%. The vast majority of denied claims are never appealed. This post is about a successful appeal, or perhaps even a claim which was never denied at all, by username “24 Hour Luigi Mangione”, and user B asserts that this is proof that Luigi has saved lives answering imaginary hypothetical user A, but in fact it doesn’t prove that even a single person was saved unless it can show more people were approved than otherwise would have been.
From where I’m sitting it just looks like 2 dudes furiously masturbating each other, AKA circlejerking.
Ah yes, the end all argument: annecdotal evidence.
If your default assumption is that this event:
Did not cause an immediate “panic” reduction in insurance denials, even briefly.
Even if it did, that this happening did not save anyone’s life.
You are just coping because the idea of killing someone ending up saving lives makes you feel icky.
Even if this is just an anecdote, I find the contrary claim harder to believe.
My default assumption is that this is a shit argument and the people who push it are dishonest fools. There is no (2). There is no second part to this stance, you haven’t presented any evidence yet and you’re posturing as if it’s 100% true.
IDK if the people actually denying claims were scared enough to change their behavior, well plausible enough ya
Wonder if any updated guidance went out to them at any point, written or not
User asked for a “single” anecdote, user got a single anecdote. So what’s the problem?
Even the lowest claim acceptance rates were passing people at 67% according to data. Average was more like 84%. The vast majority of denied claims are never appealed. This post is about a successful appeal, or perhaps even a claim which was never denied at all, by username “24 Hour Luigi Mangione”, and user B asserts that this is proof that Luigi has saved lives answering imaginary hypothetical user A, but in fact it doesn’t prove that even a single person was saved unless it can show more people were approved than otherwise would have been.
From where I’m sitting it just looks like 2 dudes furiously masturbating each other, AKA circlejerking.