hegemonicon comments on Criteria for Rational Political Conversation - Less Wrong

-5 Post author: woozle 26 August 2010 03:53PM

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

Comments (39)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: hegemonicon 26 August 2010 07:25:11PM *  2 points [-]

Voted up since this doesn't deserve it's low score, but I'll echo what some other commenters are saying- don't spend so much time discussing your own meandering thought processes. It is not an effective writing style. You're not writing a whodunnit, you don't need to worry about spoiling the ending - give me the main points immediately so I can think about them while reading the rest.

With regards to the content, what examples can you give of a documented (or UNdocumented) reasoning process? If you're suggesting this as a normative procedure to follow, how do you plan on overcoming the enormous transaction costs this places on conversations?

(For what it's worth I fell into the same trap of writing a post, revising it heavily, getting tired of it, declaring "its done" and receiving a lukewarm response when I submitted it. My advice would be to simply put it aside for a week or so, then return to it with a more rested/critical eye.)

Comment author: Perplexed 26 August 2010 08:18:05PM 4 points [-]

In particular, when you find yourself including a Monty Python reference suggesting, "I know this sucks, but I am sophisticated enough to laugh at myself about it," then you should realize that it is time to start over.