prase comments on More Irrationality Game - Less Wrong

-7 [deleted] 03 July 2012 04:16PM

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

Comments (64)

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

Comment author: Jack 03 July 2012 06:51:47PM 3 points [-]

I noticed it was probably Will right away, but I don't really see the problem. It's a reasonable post and he could make (and probably has) non-obvious sockpuppets if we wanted to. You can't credibly threaten to ban non-obvious sockpuppets so why ban the ones that at least let us know who it really is? So long as the sock-puppets behave themselves why does it matter?

If people think the thread is a good idea upvote/participate. If they don't, don't. Whether or not the sockpuppet Will uses is obvious or non-obvious shouldn't make a difference.

The use of sockpuppets doesn't seem problematic to me unless they're being used to bolster support for something the true-user has a vested interest it. I.e. if someone with some responsibility did something wrong and they invent a sockpuppet to defend themselves. But they seem really unproblematic when they're obviously sockpuppets.

Comment author: prase 03 July 2012 09:10:05PM 0 points [-]

We should punish even obvious sockpuppets for slippery-slope reasons. Any sockpuppet, obvious or not, accepted by the community will be interpreted by someone as a signal that there's nothing wrong with sockpuppetry.

Also, I have a moderate to strong distaste for bizarre behaviour, such as creating obvious sockpuppets when there is no obvious reason. Absurdist fiction is not my favourite genre.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 06 July 2012 03:58:09AM 0 points [-]

In fact from a slippery-slope/community norm point of view obvious sockpuppets are worse than non-obvious ones.