Eliezer explicitly forbade discussion of FAI/Singularity topics on lesswrong.com for the first few months because he didn't want discussion of such topics to be the primary focus of the community.

Again, "refining the art of human rationality" is the central idea that everything here revolves around. That doesn't mean that FAI and related topics aren't important, but lesswrong.com would continue to thrive (albeit less so) if all discussion of singularity ceased.

• Google site:lesswrong.com "me" 5,360 results
• Google site:lesswrong.com "I" 7,520 results
• Google site:lesswrong.com "it" 7,640 results
• Google site:lesswrong.com "a" 7,710 results

Perhaps you overestimate the extent to which google search results on a term reflect the importance of the concept to which the word refers.

I note that:

• The best posts on 'rationality' are among those that do not use the word 'rationality'*.
• Similar to 'Omega' and 'Clippy', AI is a useful agent to include when discussing questions of instrumental rationality. It allows us to consider highly rational agents in the abstract without all the bullshit and normative dead weight that gets thrown into conversations whenever the agents in question are humans.