>Yup and I disagree with it. I don't blame the dude for the outcome, sometimes you do what you can and it doesn't work out.

If it's the case that you can do everything you can and still fail, how are you disagreeing with the article?

// If it's the case that you can do everything you can and still fail, how are you disagreeing with the article

It's about moving the probably of desired outcome from zero to likely. Like, let's say op really wanted someone to "touch his genitals"- badly enough to invest a year in working on his physique, appearance, and personality. There's still no guarantee that it will work but it will move the odds tremendously.

If he does nothing, he's taking the guaranteed fail and I think that's sad.

>quarantined fail

What does this mean? Im not familiar with the term

Typo of "guaranteed" - fixed it, thanks.

Is it moving them from "zero" to "likely", or from "zero" to "nonzero but still very unlikely"?

Because for a lot of people it's really the latter, and it's no surprise when working out hard to basically buy a lottery ticket is not something they are enthusiastic about.

Not gp. Actually agree with the article, but I find it interesting that people seem to be latching on to the first part and ignoring the second part. The article doesn't suggest a solution as much as presents a conflict between the two.

Trying to resolve that conflict raises a number of questions. Have you done everything you can? If there's a possibility or even likelihood that you'll fail, should you still try?