SilasBarta comments on Common Errors in History - Less Wrong

4 Post author: PhilGoetz 09 February 2010 07:27PM

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

Article Navigation

Sort By: Best

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: SilasBarta 10 February 2010 02:13:12AM 2 points [-]

If you do like this post and modded it up, please leave a comment explaining why. (It's already back to +1 ... apparently I'm missing out on a treasure trove of karma because of some not-quite-finished articles that should easily get me at least 10 in their present state...)

Comment author: Unknowns comment score below threshold [+] (7 children)

Comment author: SilasBarta 10 February 2010 06:54:32PM * -1 points [-]

Since you mention it, I've noticed the suspicious phenomenon of PhilGoetz's top-level posts getting modded down harshly and then, without supporting posts showing up, they come back into positive territory. Exactly what's happening here.

This is an unusual pattern to consistently happen -- I hope no one is acting as a "plunge protection team" for anyone :-/

Comment author: MrHen 10 February 2010 07:32:17PM 1 point [-]

This is happening to almost every post. Mine are displaying the same behavior. My last two posts are at +6, +8 but the impression I got from the comments was almost entirely negative.

Comment author: SilasBarta 10 February 2010 07:40:04PM 0 points [-]

That looks like a different phenomenon: in this one, you drew out interesting comments (which you noted in an addendum), and so people may have been modding that up. And I think that one only went down to -1, and the other one never went into negative territory.

(Though yes, to be brutally honest, it does bother me that the new karma system gives someone 90 points for this, but 12 points for this. )

In the case of PhilGoetz's posts, I've seen at least two others go down to something like -4, and then, long after people have moved on, it goes positive. Hmmm...

Comment author: orthonormal 11 February 2010 03:44:55AM * 2 points [-]

(Though yes, to be brutally honest, it does bother me that the new karma system gives someone 90 points for this, but 12 points for this.)

Your example is valid, and you added the disclaimer of brutal honesty, but I had an instinctive negative reaction to the fact that you used your own comment as the prime example of karma injustice. (Ev-psych story: holding oneself up as the victim of injustice might get a person what they want, but it often comes off as a strong signal of low status.)

As a point of style, this would be something to avoid where possible.

ETA: This... looks harsher than I intended. I was hoping to give advice about an aspect of navigating this kind of social world, not to attack the quality of the comment above. Maybe I need to eat dinner before commenting again.

Comment author: wedrifid 11 February 2010 05:19:09AM 1 point [-]

(Ev-psych story: holding oneself up as the victim of injustice might get a person what they want, but it often comes off as a strong signal of low status.)

It can, but there is a line in there between 'victim of injustice' and 'someone who has the social resources to get away with demanding more status by claiming offence'. It comes down to how good you are at framing situations and how scared other people are of rejecting or ignoring your claim.

Comment author: SilasBarta 11 February 2010 03:50:53AM 1 point [-]

I agree with your general point, but look at the specifics of this case. MrHen's addendum in the 90-point post is:

This post was edited to fix a few problems and errors. If you are at all interested in more details behind the illusion presented here, there are a handful of excellent comments below.

and links my very 12 point comment as being an excellent one. And note that I said I was being "brutally honest" (i.e. an admittedly candid opinion) and that it bothers me, not that it's something wrong in a more objective sense.

There was a reason for that phrasing, and I trust you adjusted for it.

Comment author: wedrifid 11 February 2010 05:20:58AM 0 points [-]

and links my very 12 point comment as being an excellent one. And note that I said I was being "brutally honest" (i.e. an admittedly candid opinion) and that it bothers me, not that it's something wrong in a more objective sense.

(I expect brutally honest to warn that the honesty reflects poorly on someone else. "I must admit" would "to be honest" make me expect a more self-reflective admission.)

Comment author: ShardPhoenix 13 February 2010 11:39:35PM * 0 points [-]

I thought it was short and interesting, and at any rate not worthy of negative karma.

SilasBarta comments on Common Errors in History - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (47)

Nearest Meetups

Virtual Study Room

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Rationality Quotes

Recent Wiki Edits

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Recent Karma Awards

Comments (47)

Top Contributors, 30 Days

You'll need to login or register to do that

(Don't worry, it only takes a few seconds)

Create

Login