AllanCrossman comments on GroupThink, Theism ... and the Wiki - Less Wrong

-4 Post author: byrnema 13 April 2009 05:28PM

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

Comments (60)

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

Comment author: byrnema 14 April 2009 04:29:54PM *  0 points [-]

I wish that negative scores would show on the top of posts so that I could quantify just how unpopular this post was. I speculate that the main reason that I am down-voted is because people didn't like my definitions. However, my bad definitions just support the main argument of my post which is that it is difficult for a newcomer to figure out what you are talking about. (As suggested, I could go 'read the classics' for a few years and come back ... but I trust that is not required or expected.)

A negative scoring also indicates to me that my push for rigorous definitions as a precondition for discussion is not met with enthusiasm. I'm simultaneously disappointed and accepting of this. While I would prefer to know what you are talking about, I understand that much (arguably, more) progress can be made by proceeding organically; allowing the definitions to shift from speaker to speaker and argument to argument.

Comment author: AllanCrossman 14 April 2009 04:33:28PM *  0 points [-]

I wish that negative scores would show on the top of posts so that I could quantify just how unpopular this post was.

I agree partially: such scores should at least be visible to the original poster.

However, even without that feature, you may still be able to work out the net vote by seeing how badly your karma was affected, if at all.