I am confused about Eliezer's metaethics. If you ask 10 LessWrongers what Eliezer's metaethical theory is, you get approximately 10 distinct positions. In other words, I don't know how high a probability to assign to it, because I'm very unsure of what it even means.

I'm even more confused that people seem to think it quite natural to spend years debating the ethical positions of someone watching the debate.

I agree. The world really is mad.

A little creative editing with Stirner makes for a catchy line in this regard:

Do not think that I am jesting or speaking figuratively when I regard almost the whole world of men as veritable fools, fools in a madhouse, who only seem to go about free because the madhouse in which they walk takes in so broad a space.