Swimmer963 comments on Suffering as attention-allocational conflict - Less Wrong

49 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 18 May 2011 03:12PM

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

Comments (61)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: thomblake 19 May 2011 08:09:12PM 2 points [-]

That said, I've seen plenty of communities where "I agree" is considered a taboo statement, and I always find it sort of surprising how often I actually see it around here

Some of us tried to enforce a noise-cancelling norm of squashing "I agree" type comments early on, but it was overridden by a concern that being generally unpleasant is no good for the community. See Why our kind can't cooperate (and for balance, Well-kept gardens die by pacifism)

Comment author: Will_Newsome 20 May 2011 05:00:40AM 2 points [-]

"I agree" is useful in cases where people think that their agreement would provide me with a non-negligible update, because they know that I respect their rationality or because they consider themselves experts in the domain in question. For example, an "I agree" from thomblake would provide me with non-negligible evidence if written in response to some speculations about academic philosophy. Of course, most people don't signal agreement for this reason, so it's not really what you were talking about.

Comment author: thomblake 20 May 2011 02:03:23PM 2 points [-]

I agree