pedanterrific comments on Amanda Knox: post mortem - Less Wrong

23 Post author: gwern 20 October 2011 04:10PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (483)
Tags: current_affairs bayesian survey biases calibration predictions practical applied

Comments (483)

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

Comment author: pedanterrific 21 October 2011 02:46:36AM 0 points [-]

I vaguely recall that you got pretty annoyed at me a year or so ago when I pointed out a contradiction in your reasoning.

... Also pay specific attention to my exchange with wedrifid.

Are you referring to the 'exchange' that starts around here and continues from there? If so... I'm not so sure bringing this to people's attention is in your best interests.

Comment author: brazil84 21 October 2011 02:53:51AM -1 points [-]

Are you referring to the 'exchange' that starts around here and continues from there?

No, I was referring to the exchange in the earlier Knox thread.

I'm not so sure bringing this to people's attention is in your best interests.

For me, this is not a competition to see how many people I can win over or how many karma points I can accumulate.

Comment author: pedanterrific 21 October 2011 03:10:59AM 1 point [-]

If it's this you're referring to, I have to wonder how you got from there to "I suspect that your anger at me over that incident is informing your commentary". That seems like blowing it way out of proportion.

Comment author: brazil84 21 October 2011 03:34:42AM *  0 points [-]

Ok, I think I found it:

http://lesswrong.com/lw/1j7/the_amanda_knox_test_how_an_hour_on_the_internet/1c6t?context=9#comments

And here's an exchange between me and him which got pretty personal:

http://lesswrong.com/lw/1ph/youre_entitled_to_arguments_but_not_that/1njx?context=1#1njx

He's apparently deleted some of his comments, but I wouldn't have asked him to stop making things personal if he hadn't done so.

Here's one thing which he said (and later deleted, it seems):

I think you could sincerely assert six mutually contradictory things before breakfast.

Clearly he and I have some history here, to put it politely.

Anyway, was reading over the thread and now I remember I banned the guy.

Comment author: pedanterrific 21 October 2011 03:38:34AM 0 points [-]

Ok, I think I found it:

Yes, that's the third link I suggested.

an exchange between me and him which got pretty personal

And that was the first.

Here's one thing which he said (and later deleted, it seems):

Dude, that was in the post you linked directly to.

Comment author: brazil84 21 October 2011 03:45:46AM 0 points [-]

Ok, so you can see that he and I have a history here. It seems pretty likely to me that his most recent comments were motivated by personal animus. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

Comment author: pedanterrific 21 October 2011 03:51:20AM *  3 points [-]

Okay, looking back, wedrifid lays out his point as:

  • brazil84 didn't learn from the opinions and reasoning of other fairly rational and intelligent people.
  • brazil84 expended sufficient energy on the topic in question to be able to arrive at a sane conclusion.
  • brazil84 did not arrive at a sane conclusion.
  • Don't do what brazil84 did because it makes you wrong and also makes you look silly.

And you respond with... an ad hominem in the form of an appeal to motive.

Hm.

Comment author: brazil84 21 October 2011 03:20:17AM 0 points [-]

No, that wasn't it either.

Comment author: pedanterrific 21 October 2011 03:26:23AM *  2 points [-]

...Maybe this one? (That's the one that ends in you saying "Lol, that's nonsense.")

Side note: I'm not sure whether to be amazed, impressed or disturbed at how many arguments you've had with wedrifid. This whole line of conversation is veering into the farcical.

Comment author: brazil84 21 October 2011 03:38:16AM *  -2 points [-]

Side note: I'm not sure whether to be amazed, impressed or disturbed at how many arguments you've had with wedrifid. This whole line of conversation is veering into the farcical.

Well the bottom line is that he and I have a history here, a lot more than I realized a few minutes ago. And now he seems to be claiming he doesn't remember our exchanges; it's apparently just a coincidence that he needs to publicly announce -- in essence -- I've reached conclusions which are insane.

Comment author: pedanterrific 21 October 2011 03:43:35AM 4 points [-]

To be fair, those exchanges probably wouldn't be particularly noteworthy from wedrifid's point of view.

Comment author: brazil84 21 October 2011 03:52:14AM 2 points [-]

I concede that if he has personal exchanges like that on a regular basis, it's plausible that he really doesn't remember me.

Comment author: thomblake 24 October 2011 06:50:10PM 2 points [-]

he and I have a history here, a lot more than I realized a few minutes ago.

And now he seems to be claiming he doesn't remember our exchanges

Given these two statements, I'm surprised at your surprise.

Comment author: brazil84 24 October 2011 07:11:00PM -1 points [-]

Given these two statements, I'm surprised at your surprise.

What exactly do you think I am surprised about?

Comment author: thomblake 24 October 2011 07:26:07PM 2 points [-]

Your memory of the exchanges seems to have been hazy at best, and yet you seemed incredulous that wedrifid doesn't remember them.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit