Nominull comments on "What Is Wrong With Our Thoughts" - Less Wrong

23 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 17 May 2009 07:24AM

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

Comments (103)

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

Comment author: Nominull 17 May 2009 08:54:39PM 7 points [-]

Voting something down as deliberately obscure because you don't understand it strikes me as an egregious case of the mind projection fallacy.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 18 May 2009 10:33:30PM *  3 points [-]

If you can take the time to write a comment, but conceal all of its meanings in an acronym, with no hint from context as to the meaning of the acronym, then you deserve to be voted down, because you save 2 seconds of your time but waste many seconds of the time of everyone who reads it and doesn't know what the acronym means.

We need a catchy name for the fallacy of being over-eager to accuse people of fallacies that you have catchy names for.

(I could be wrong about TL;DR. It's a judgement call as to whether your readers should know an acronym or not. I'd expect people here to know what LW or OB mean.)

Comment author: JGWeissman 18 May 2009 10:38:39PM 3 points [-]

We need a catchy name for the fallacy of being over-eager to accuse people of fallacies that you have catchy names for.

How about "Catchy Fallacy Name Fallacy"?

And I agree that it applies here.

Comment author: Nominull 18 May 2009 11:10:29PM 0 points [-]

lol

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 22 May 2009 07:41:54PM 1 point [-]

waste many seconds of the time of everyone who reads it and doesn't know what the acronym means.

Use urban dictionary.

Comment author: hirvinen 28 May 2009 10:45:56AM 1 point [-]

Thanks to fast internet connections, good web search and online dictionaries, failing to expand an acronym only increases the cost from 5 seconds to 5 seconds per reader...