This is neat to look at from a psychological perspective. I bet there's a pretty good correlation between the people who see everyone else go, "yep, works as reported" and decides to try it for themselves anyway, and people who aren't easily convinced by research or science in other subjects.
To be fair, that correlation would probably cut both ways. For example, the people who don't decide to try things for themselves being more susceptible to being swayed by propaganda.
Interesting to look at, as you said. I assume that different personality types evolved because that made us more robust as a species.
Right, like all the intrepid outsider-scientists that are resilient to the propaganda of a round Earth. Sadly, many of the commenters here are still somewhat susceptible to propaganda, since they locked their account and then believed the results of the experiment. For maximum resilience to scientific propaganda, they should perform the experiment repeatedly and refuse to accept the results each time.
Sorry, maybe I didn't do a good job with my comment. A better more specific example of what I meant might be all the people who drank the cool-aid at Jonestown. They bought the cult propaganda hook line and sinker, and died for it. Sometimes people are too sceptical, sometimes they are not sceptical enough. I didn't mean that the twitter lockout was propaganda.
And my closing thought was that it probably make us better as a society that we have both sceptical and non-sceptical people.
