= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Incorrect comments on How can we get more and better LW contrarians? - 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 (328)
I completely disagree.
Is there an answer (other than zero), that you wouldn't completely disagree with? If not, why did you ask me for my number first?
FWIW, I don't think "willingness to intelligently disagree with consensus" = contrarian. Disagreeing for the simple purpose of disagreeing is pointless.
I would disagree with you if you said zero too.
If this chain of posts is a joke, I don't think I get it. If it's not, I am mildly amused.
I think it's a meta-joke. Incorrect is a hyper-contrarian arguing about how many contrarians there should be :)
Not only that, but in an uninformative and confrontational manner, posing the problem of how to respond to generate better contrarianism.
I'm not joking, but it's pretty clear Incorrect is. I'm not amused, but the joke is basically at my expense, so that's not very good evidence of whether Incorrect was actually amusing.
Speaking as one who often upvotes bad jokes...
No.
For clarification, I only upvote good bad jokes.
TimS is encouraging people to be more contrarian, so Incorrect is disagreeing with him.
contrarian != willing to intelligently disagree with consensus
Is this the right room for an argument?
Edit: I seemed to have failed my spot test to notice that some else in the thread had aready linked to the same video.