Morendil comments on A Suite of Pragmatic Considerations in Favor of Niceness - Less Wrong

82 Post author: Alicorn 05 January 2010 09:32PM

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

Comments (183)

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

Comment author: Morendil 06 January 2010 05:28:11PM *  14 points [-]

We can taboo "nice", and say instead "thinking about how my comment will make people feel, and revising it before I post it if the tone seems antagonistic or otherwise likely to distract from the underlying point".

The salient features are: a) thinking about feelings and b) acknowledging that form matters as well as content.

Your comment is a good example of "nice". You said you interpreted "nice" in such a way that you didn't get much from Alicorn's post, but you said that with some regard for her feelings. Let me attempt to rephrase it in a "mean" tone, attempting to preserve the content, and please tell me if the difference is apparent:

Last time I looked, "nice" was politically correct bullcrap for plain old "boring". "Nice" is what my mom calls old ladies and their doggies. Can we get back to discussing rationality now, or are you going to waste more of everyone's time ?

Comment author: Jack 06 January 2010 05:39:30PM 0 points [-]

We can taboo "nice", and say instead "thinking about how my comment will make people feel, and revising it before I post it if the tone seems antagonistic or otherwise likely to distract from the underlying point".

Instead of tabooing a perfectly good word, how about we just agree to define "nice" as "thinking about how my comment will make people feel, and revising it before I post it if the tone seems antagonistic or otherwise likely to distract from the underlying point"?

Comment author: ciphergoth 06 January 2010 07:53:06PM 1 point [-]

Taboo in this sense, I think.

Comment author: Morendil 06 January 2010 06:06:57PM 0 points [-]

I meant taboo in that sense, yes.

Comment author: Jack 06 January 2010 06:13:33PM 0 points [-]

Erm, I see. Sorry :-)