Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

MaoShan comments on Less Wrong Polls in Comments - Less Wrong

79 Post author: jimrandomh 19 September 2012 04:19PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (300)

Sort By: Best

Show:

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

Comment author: MaoShan comment score below threshold [+] (22 children)

Comment author: wedrifid 21 September 2012 05:12:41AM * 8 points [-]

We've covered this.

Seriously, what is it about this that is so hard to understand? I mean it was right there in the grandparent:

About the same as the what you could write in comments already but prettier.

You can insult people if you want. You can use text. You can insult people using using ad hoc polls with karma sinks that we've been making do with for years. You can insult people in comments and happen to use the new poll markdown syntax. You can even insult people with the markdown image feature that we've always had:

Either way the rules are the same: You can get away with insulting people to the extent that you can do so subtly, choose targets wisely and be well in tune with social dynamics.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: MaoShan 21 September 2012 02:22:56AM -2 points [-]

That is just an example of how polls can go horribly wrong, I have absolutely nothing against wedifrid and have no inside knowledge to his/her appearance or personal life.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Kindly 21 September 2012 03:01:53AM 4 points [-]

In what way does the comment become worse by virtue of containing a poll? You could equally say "wedrifid is a misshapen troll with no friends".

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: radical_negative_one 21 September 2012 03:08:02AM * 3 points [-]

No, the poll is actually less bad. You see, your comment proposes:

wedrifid is ( misshapen AND a troll AND has no friends )

while the poll merely asserts

wedrifid is ( misshapen XOR a troll XOR has no friends )

Wedrifid got off pretty lightly, from this perspective.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Epiphany 21 September 2012 03:26:55AM * 0 points [-]

Because now we can tell him: "Wedrifid, you are misshapen. An appeal to popularity filtered through a false trichotomy says so."

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Kindly 21 September 2012 03:30:29AM 1 point [-]

Well, yes, but polls that are false trichotomies are a bad idea no matter whether they insult wedrifid or not. I expect LessWrong to be really good at noticing them, actually, so I don't think that's a problem.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: MBlume 21 September 2012 03:59:57AM 0 points [-]

Your confidence is inspiring, but I'd bet some false trichotomies are more obvious than others. (Though I can't immediately think of any examples of subtler false trichotomies to rattle off, so yeah)

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Epiphany 21 September 2012 04:37:30AM -1 points [-]

An example of something that is NOT a false *otomoy would be the shorter list. (See other comment)

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Epiphany 21 September 2012 04:33:19AM * -1 points [-]

Since we can't verify that there is not an option we don't see (appeal to ignorance is the best we've got for this), every set of options is essentially a false *otomy.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Kindly 21 September 2012 11:38:33AM 0 points [-]

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Epiphany 21 September 2012 05:17:24PM * 0 points [-]

K I'll try this: To make sure you are not presenting a false dichotomy, not only do you need to include all the options you know of, you also need to make sure you know all the options. How do you make sure there isn't an option you don't know?

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Alicorn 21 September 2012 05:19:48PM 6 points [-]

Include "Other".

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Epiphany 21 September 2012 07:25:06PM * 1 point [-]

This time I know better than to interpret your text in a suspicious manner. Sorry for doing that to you in the other thread. FWIW, I liked your suggestion to play rationalist taboo once I understood that it was what you were suggesting. I have woken up to the fact that I interpreted your words suspiciously due to you expressing some unfriendliness toward me. This time, my perspective is that you probably intend to be constructive. I would like to understand what you mean by telling me to "include other" but I don't. To me, this is a cryptic message. The other one seemed cryptic at first also.

Vote up
Vote down

continue this thread »

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 21 September 2012 12:10:40PM * -1 points [-]

She's referring to unknown unknowns.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: Epiphany 21 September 2012 05:16:15PM 0 points [-]

*she

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 21 September 2012 05:18:06PM -1 points [-]

Apologies. Will fix.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: MaoShan 22 September 2012 03:23:03AM 0 points [-]

I personally think I came across as more of an asshole by presenting my insult in the form of a poll, but I can't think of a particular reason why that is.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: TheOtherDave 22 September 2012 04:06:56AM 1 point [-]

Well, I consider forced-choice polls of that form a bit obnoxious, whether insulting or not, because I feel like I'm being tricked into saying something I don't believe. E.g., "My favorite pizza topping is: (a) pepperoni, (b) sausage, (c) mushroom" is an obnoxious poll, but is not insulting to anyone. That contributes somewhat. Had you added options that allowed for the possibility of your implicit assumptions being false (e.g., "none of the above", "I don't have a favorite pizza topping", etc.) that element would have been removed.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: RichardKennaway 21 September 2012 08:06:00AM 1 point [-]

That is just an example of how polls can go horribly wrong

No, it's an example of how you went horribly wrong.

I have absolutely nothing against wedifrid

I don't find this a credible reading of your action.

Vote up
Vote down

Comment author: MaoShan 22 September 2012 03:33:18AM * 0 points [-]

As if I have a prior history of insulting wedifrid?

I apologize to anyone who took the poll seriously, and especially to wedifrid for happening to be the first comment along that line that I replied to.

I was only asking the community to realize ahead of time the potential pitfalls of this new feature.

Time will tell if it was worth losing some karma for my good intentions.

Vote up
Vote down

MaoShan comments on Less Wrong Polls in Comments - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (300)

Nearest Meetups

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Wiki Edits:

Tags

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Top Contributors, All Time

MaoShan comments on Less Wrong Polls in Comments - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (300)

Nearest Meetups

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Wiki Edits:

Tags

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Top Contributors, All Time

You'll need to login or register to do that

(Don't worry, it only takes a few seconds)

Create a new account

Login