= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Annoyance comments on The Sacred Mundane - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (103)
Because no matter how much I thought about it, I couldn't find a way in which the comment was a useful contribution to the site; rather, it seemed to be spam no matter which perspective I tried to view it in.
Crosslinking is potentially valuable - announcing that something from here has been crosslinked by you is not. If there's some important response elsewhere to a post made here, that is notable and worthy. Stating that you're trying to provoke such a response isn't.
I don't mind the crosslink but I agree it's probably better to wait until there's interesting responses at the other site.
I haven't read that forum, but "[somebody] on why we should abandon religion" doesn't sound like a very catchy title on an atheist forum. If I saw it, it probably wouldn't grab my notice. "Oh, I already know why we should abandon religion, I wouldn't be reading this forum if I didn't, now would I?" would be the unconscious evaluation, and by then my eyes would have moved to the title of the next topic already.
In general, I'd say that "[person] on [subject]" is only a good topic if you know that your subject audience already knows who the person is, otherwise it provides no information. Eliezer's certainly well-known among the transhumanist/singularitarian crowd, but among the general atheist crowd? I doubt it.
TBH I've never got particularly interesting discussions out of that forum, and I've tried quite hard.
Probably for the same reasons so many here are dismissive of Objectivists.