wedrifid comments on [META] Introduction thread attitudes and discussions - Less Wrong

22 Post author: Vaniver 02 January 2012 01:18AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (42)

Comments (42)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: wedrifid 03 January 2012 07:40:31PM 3 points [-]

So, we have three introduction threads, and recently have had several contentious ones, like AspiringKnitter's introduction as a theist or Bakkot's introduction as a proponent of infanticide.

If you come up with any policy that declares Bakkot's introduction should not provoke exactly the conversation is started then I will wholeheartedly oppose it. It has been the most interesting conversation here in weeks. What a few self selected people happen to notice (and care about) on some meta post in the discussion section most certainly shouldn't be enough to stop people engaging in that sort of free flowing conversation.

(Can we have a meta discussion about how to discourage meta discussion about controlling what conversations people have? Because I'd much rather go back to talking about killing babies.)

Comment author: Vaniver 03 January 2012 08:59:50PM 3 points [-]

If you come up with any policy that declares Bakkot's introduction should not provoke exactly the conversation is started then I will wholeheartedly oppose it.

If the policy were that the conversation should have happened in its own discussion post rather than the introduction thread, would you oppose it?

Comment author: TheOtherDave 03 January 2012 08:06:51PM 2 points [-]

Sure we can.

Personally, I suspect the easiest way to discourage meta discussion about controlling what conversations people have is more or less the way you're doing it: participate in the discussions you think are interesting and either ignore or challenge the ones you don't.

The folks who think it's important to control such things will not in general change their minds, but thus far they routinely seem willing to attribute such challenges to LW as a whole (rather than treat the individual objectors as individuals), which seems to achieve precisely the goal you want.

Also -- hm. Wait. Were you asking ironically? Sorry.

Incidentally, I agree with you in principle, though I'm open to a "move large discussions somewhere other than the intro thread" modification if it can be made to work relatively seamlessly.

Comment author: wedrifid 03 January 2012 08:57:17PM 1 point [-]

Also -- hm. Wait. Were you asking ironically? Sorry.

Ironic but serious too. The best kind of irony. (And if there wasn't a hint of intended irony it'd be ironically self-defeating!)

Incidentally, I agree with you in principle, though I'm open to a "move large discussions somewhere other than the intro thread" modification if it can be made to work relatively seamlessly.

Good idea.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit