Douglas_Knight comments on Not Technically Lying - Less Wrong

32 Post author: Psychohistorian 04 July 2009 06:40PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (79)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 07 July 2009 02:06:56AM 1 point [-]

Thanks for the story!

I say it doesn't count. There's probably a bit of "no true Scotsman," but hear me out. My current position is that people don't get a reputation for being honest or dishonest (cf Psychohistorian); reputation probably consists of a list of allies and measures of loyalty to a generic ally.

For some meanings of "reputation" you didn't have one: Beth didn't know (though I'd need more details). Moreover, your reputation among your friends wasn't about your honesty, it was about a game you played. It wasn't that you used NTL to manipulate people, or how to extract secrets from you.

I am a little impressed that you got the reputation at all. Are you and your friends nerds? (how about Beth?)

So my new questions:
1. Can one have a reputation for being dishonest, as opposed to a reputation for not having allies?
2. Can one have a reputation for being honest? can that be positive? maybe a reputation for being honest about who are your allies?

Comment author: Nebu 09 July 2009 05:10:19PM 1 point [-]

Are you and your friends nerds? (how about Beth?)

Yes, we're nerds. I don't about Beth because she was Amy's friend rather than my friend, and I never really spoke to her again after that.

Also, I think in my circle of friends, NTL is considered "honest", so if your definition of "reputation" allows that I had a reputation of being an NTL-er (an NTL-ar?), then I'd also have one for being honest.