Those who have a lot of skin in the game have no choice but being positive.
This is only partly true - they can be negative but have the incentive to actually do something or change something. Those without skin will be negative and have no reason to do otherwise.
less skin in the game who can afford being more neutrally agnostic & skeptics.
I disagree - because if you haven't noticed, they still have desire for outcomes - they are definitely not impartial.
Yeah! maybe because 'negativity' (or defensive pessimism as I like to call it) if it is specially exerted with reasonably strong and solid arguments of logic and critical thinking, always will tend to sound way more convincing than any lightweight optimism and blind faith.
I don't think so. I believe it is because are hardwired with warning mechanisms and the negative brings out our fears. The people who often speak in the negatives speak with conviction however and that can convince people - no matter how little knowledge is there to back it up. Remember that politicians speak with conviction, as do those who support them - no matter how insane the ideas may be.
More often than not. Negativity or 'Defensive Pessimism' is not more than the tangible result of a great deal of very accurate & attent observations to the details and vivid past experiences. :)
But, it is a personal account of the world that might not apply to others who have a different set of skills and wills. The people who are the most negative about Hive are also the ones that have done - just what they wanted here. Funny, isn't it?