LauraABJ comments on That other kind of status - Less Wrong

72 Post author: Yvain 29 December 2009 02:45AM

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

Comments (108)

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

Comment author: happyseaurchin 29 December 2009 10:20:30PM *  13 points [-]

I am sorry to hear that. I am not enough of an academic to adopt the nomenclature accurately enough. I do apologise.

Since you are to delete this post, may I suggest

  1. Automate the process so that if a comment receives eg -2 points, it is deleted. This may avoid the uncomfortable feelings I had upon reading your comment, as well as the feelings you must have had in writing it.

  2. You make posting etiquette a little clearer in the ABOUT section.

Although I am disheartened that my enthusiasm got the better of me in that I contributed before knowing the lay of the land, I will still look forward to reading posts. Perhaps one day I shall be able to contribute something useful. Be well.

Comment author: LauraABJ 29 December 2009 11:18:26PM 5 points [-]

I was interested to see what you had posted that got you expelled from the blog. I think your problem is two-fold: 1) Your comments are very unclearly phrased, such that it takes the reader a long time to figure out what you are trying to say, and 2) You have commented a lot in a very short period of time.

Try putting more time into a small number of well thought-out, well-phrased comments.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 29 December 2009 11:53:39PM 2 points [-]

Seemed to me like confused thinking, not confused writing, or I would've acted otherwise. You can tell people to write better. Thinking better is a matter of years if it gets done at all.

Comment author: LauraABJ 30 December 2009 12:03:34AM 1 point [-]

I had hoped that by asking him to write clearly, he would need to have a point to make clear. You are probably right that this is not the case.

Comment author: happyseaurchin 30 December 2009 10:30:12PM 2 points [-]

Thank you, LauraABJ. My language is not precise enough to match the level of eg Eliezer. My experience has mostly been with children. My experience justifies a rather extreme position: objectification of conscious experience, especially in the form of writing, is inherently misleading if our objective is to comprehend the human condition. That is, although I respect linguistic control, there are strict limits that prevent words from carrying the levels of comprehension we are seeking. Hence, the adoption of maths. I was so enthused by the articles here, I got carried away...

Thank you, Eliezer; in the balance between writing and thinking, my writing is worse. I do apologise, but in the same way I have been premature with my commentary to the LW site, you may have been premature with your judgement of my thinking. I have thought and rethought my words here, and the best I can come up with is this. This community, and especially you, have had the time to explore your ideas and develop a system of thinking. This is clearly very powerful, and it attracts bright minds (even as non-verbal as my own). I have also developed a system of thinking, and it mostly relies on dynamics that are not based entirely on the mechanics of words -- hence my disadvantage here. There is an overlap, thankfully: mathematics. With further reading into the application of bayes' theorem on this site, I hope to contribute something useful, in a manner acceptable, such that our goals are brought closer.