nazgulnarsil comments on Less Wrong NYC: Case Study of a Successful Rationalist Chapter - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (166)
I'm a little surprised to see the issues of LWers interacting with women reduced to "being careful when discussing explicit awareness of social reality" ... with a link to PUA stuff.
1) PUA stuff is hardly the only example out there of "explicit awareness of social reality".
2) It's quite telling that the implication of the post is that "women don't like explicit awareness of social reality", rather than the (more accurate) "women don't like PUA".
One way to encourage women to participate in rationalist communities might be to make a conscious effort not to portray us as silly, manipulative, fickle, irrational gold-diggers. Some rationalists do a good job of this ... many don't. And PUAs, rationalist and otherwise, are usually bad at this. (Yes, there are exceptions.)
PUA stuff targets the middle of the bell curve. Of course it looks silly to intelligent people.
This. Pickup at the right of the bell curve looks a bit different. It involves more puns, for instance.
Is there a more comprehensive resource anywhere on picking up the right side of the bell curve?
edited to add: as long as I'm asking how to pull the long tail, so to speak, how 'bout resources considering the culturally Russian, Indian, Japanese, Chinese, etc.?
I'd guess that this is just indicative that being at the right end of the bell curve works on those who are also at the right end of the bell curve.
FYI - puns and wit work as a pick-up line... only if they're your puns and wit... not if you're just parroting somebody else's idea of what "should work".
Pickup at the right end of the bell curve looks like this:
"If I were to ask you out, would your answer to that question be the same as the answer to this one?"
(Disclaimer: I didn't make it up. I saw it somewhere else on this site, long time ago.)
looks silly to me. ;)
Smullyan invented this "coercive logic" in "The Riddle of Scheherazade".
Pretty sure this is much, much older than that.
How much do you actually communicate with people who are around the middle of the bell curve? In places like LW, people often have a very skewed perspective about the bottom three quartiles.
My experience is that intelligent people overestimate the abilities of people around the middle.
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/07/stupider-than-you-realize.html
Skewed which way?
It's skewed in several ways, each of which would be a complex topic in its own right. In this particular context, I have the impression that nazgulnarsil's idea of what the middle of the distribution looks like would correspond more exactly to somewhat higher percentiles.