= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ArisKatsaris comments on Who owns LessWrong? - 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 (83)
Why? As I asked in the title, Who owns LessWrong? For example: Who pays for the servers?
This is not me posting original research. The existing article is offensive in tone, commits several logical errors, and its main conclusion - that there is no selection for behaviors that benefit the group rather than the individual - is one that no evolutionary biologist today would agree with.
If those problems are present in the sections of the existing article, they wouldn't be corrected by having a different section that argues the opposite way.
If the existing article is offensive in tone, the solution is to correct its tone, not to just add paragraphs of a different or opposite tone. If it commits logical errors, the solution is to correct the errors. If it speaks falsely, the solution is to have it speak correctly.
Not to have the article just have a new section that says "All the above is wrong, and here's why."
You were effectively not editing the article, but carrying out an argument about the issue, and you were carrying it out on the page itself. That isn't how the process must work with wiki pages.