= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jaibot comments on Changing Systems is Different than Running Controlled Experiments - Don’t Choose How to Run Your Country That Way! - 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
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (260)
This seems like a good article - could any downvoters post their rationale? (at time of posting, article is at -3)
Edit: There's also some really insightful and interesting discussion going on and a remarkable lack of flame - I'd hate to see it hidden.
It violates the politics is the mind-killer rule, i.e., don't use examples from contemporary politics for an apolitical point.
I wonder if that's why there's so much downvoting in the comments here?
I would be surprised if that were the case. Non-passionate annoyance about people discussing politics doesn't seem like the sort of thing that would inspire around 30 down votes of the post and multiple people going and down voting 10-20 of my comments at a time.
Rape is a topic that people care a lot about for a number of different reasons, with very different desired outcomes regarding wanting discussion and lack thereof.
The comments up until recent have actually been surprisingly chill and non-flaming.
When I try to talk to people about hot topics like rape or child abuse in person, the most common response I get is people really not wanting to talk about it. "Sorry, I can't handle that right now" type responses. My experience is that most people really don't want to think about it and feel somewhat violated even at bringing the topic up. My guess is that most of those people glossed over the post, and neither up nor down voted, although they may have down voted.
People who have experience with rape and other forms of being violated often really want to have discussion about it, especially sane and level discussion when in the context of Less Wrong, which I think is why the up voting. I have many potential theories about why the down voting. There are probably several different sets who are doing it.
One obvious candidate would be anyone who has caused someone to have sex with them that was non-consensual. If we assume that Less Wrong even roughly reflects the general population, and that the article I cited above even roughly reflects the general population, and note that there are thousands of readers, it is safe to assume that some of those people are readers, and they probably have very strong opinions on this topic.
Another category of down voters could be people who didn't like my formatting initially, I was amused by what a strong objection there was to that.
My guess would be that the "I don't want to talk about this" reaction accounts for most of the downvotes.
I'm not sure LW is using a consistent definition of 'political', but possibly I'm misremembering what I've seen.
My impression was that the sense in which "political" was previously used here had more to do with rival identity groups whose claims on power were disputed — "Blues and Greens"; Republicans and Democrats; socialists and libertarians; and so on.
More recently, however, it seems to be used to excuse bad epistemic behavior — responding to straw men or stereotypes; mere contradiction; attacking noncentral points; etc. — on any topic pertaining to contemporary human society or social organization.
feminists vs. PUA/MRA
Avoiding the tribalism doesn't mean avoiding all the object-level bits of reality the tribes are interested in.
It seems...broken if I can get together a group of people and say "we have strong opinions about X and we call ourselves Xians" and then LessWrong doesn't discuss X anymore.
I never said we couldn't have political discussions about X. What I said was don't use X as an example when making a non-political point.
Thanks. I'm rather disappointed that someone demoted my post from main to to discussion last night - whoever did this did not identify themselves to me, and I am curious as to why. I have not yet gotten feedback regarding this or the down votes.
There have been a lot of up/down votes, which I find quite interesting, and as with yourself, would be curious to know more about. Unfortunately I didn't take tallies while watching it jiggle yesterday and I don't know of a place to access actual numbers, but I believe that it was up/down voted somewhere around a 7-15 times each direction before getting to its current state of 0.
The article is currently at 52% positive, with one upvote showing. I think the smallest number of votes which could produce that exact result is 51 positive, 50 negative.
There has to be rounding, but (looking for vaguely plausible numbers), it has to be between 67 positive, 66 negative and possibly as low as 41 positive, 40 negative, depending on how the rounding is done.
Given my druthers, I'd like to see a graph showing the votes over time.
A post that achieves a high number of votes in both directions strikes me as a very interesting post that should be called to attention. In other words, a post that is at +/- 1 because of 50 or so votes each way, is much more interesting than a post that is at +/-1 because of one or two votes.
I would recommend rather than showing just the sum, show the total of both +1's and -1's separately. It's strictly more information than just the sum.
Seconded. StackOverflow shows this information, and it's frequently interesting.
Would you mind pasting a link for this? I'd love to know exact numbers.
Sure. Here's the most-viewed question on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11227809/why-is-processing-a-sorted-array-faster-than-an-unsorted-array
If you click the score on the left, it splits into green and red, showing up and down votes respectively.
Interestingly, there are very few down-votes for such a popular question! But then again, it's an awfully interesting question, and in SO it costs you one karma point to downvote someone else.
I agree. Reddit has a "controversial" sorting that favors posts with lots of up and down votes, and I prefer to use it for finding interesting discussions.
My calculation gives possibilities of anything from +11-10 (52.38%) to +17-16 (51.52%), assuming the displayed % is rounded to the nearest whole. It now stands at 4 and 56%, implying +18-14, +19-15, or +20-16.
Thanks. I wasn't sure I had the math right.
More exactly, it's been a long time since I've done much algebra, and it was a fight to get any sense out of problem. I had a feeling there was something I didn't understand, but I had no idea the weak spot was that the rounding off range didn't include the exact percentage.
Finding out how much a single vote changes the percentage of up or down votes gives a lot of information, and this can be learned by giving a vote and withdrawing it quickly.