= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nick_Tarleton comments on Your Price for Joining - 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 (53)
I think it's about risk to credibility. If I refuse to join, my reputation is entirely my own; it flatters my fierce independence of mind, in contrast to the sheeple. If I join, anything about the organisation might reflect on me, might be used to mock me. Joining is sticking my neck out; making an excuse not to is always the safer choice.
So the group norm we really need to establish is that if you want to criticise someone for joining, only a solid case is acceptable; a cheap shot based on joining behaviour should reflect badly on the speaker.
Exactly what I was thinking.
(I think this is related to the bizarre phenomenon I occasionally see (particularly regarding the Topic That Must Not Be Named) of people saying they don't believe the conclusion of an argument because they don't think it will convince anybody – rather than because they're not convinced.)
Yes, but perceptions from outside the group are still just as problematic.
We can only do two things about that, I think: challenge it where we see it, and worry about it less.