= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ialdabaoth comments on Self-serving meta: Whoever keeps block-downvoting me, is there some way to negotiate peace? - 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
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Comments (281)
When the mass downvoting started, it very nearly mindkilled me. There's something deep-set that gets triggered when you KNOW you're being fucked with, and you KNOW you can't do anything about it but retaliate in kind. I had to put up a few hasty new Schelling fences to not descend to the same level of bullshit.
The downvote-stalker process is memetically contagious.
Sure, it fits the pattern of defection. We're better off if nobody does it.
That's an interesting hypothesis. But if so, that doesn't then mean that changing the system isn't going to cause infected people to now stop being infected. (This may be stretching the metaphor more too much.)
So you are basically saying that you had a downvoting war with another person and while you stopped downvoting them, they didn't stop downvoting you?
No, I'm saying I had a very, VERY strong impulse to respond to a perceived downvoting spat by turning it into a downvoting war. I did not actually retaliate.
In case someone hasn't mentioned it, thank you for not participating in this nasty feedback loop.
I've contributed to threads where my discussion partner's every comment was downvoted, but it wasn't me. The damage isn't done just to the one being downvoted, it's pretty annoying to be part of such conversations.
The more common retributive downvoting is, the likelier false positives for "downvoting spats" become, and that will lead to a vicious downward spiral if everyone decides to play tit for tat after someone started it.
So, I'm curious: did you actually misinterpret what ialdabaoth said as meaning that, or did you understand the literal meaning of his words but assume the underlying reality had been different, or did what ialdabaoth said actually mean that under an interpretive frame you still endorse, or something else/some combination?
I don't think that he intended to say that. On the other hand I don't have full information of what's happening and there are multiple theories that would explain the reality I observe.
I ask myself, what did ialdabaoth do, to provoke such a response? I myself think that I wrote plenty of controversial post in the past. I sometimes experienced someone downvoting 20 or 30 posts but never a really substantial amount, so that I would be worried about the affair.
The thread title is about negotiating peace. In general the notion of peace negotiations is about two sides who are at war with each other.
This information produces certain priors. ialdabaoth saying that he thinks it memetically contagious was then enough to voice that hypothesis.
(nods) OK, I think I understood that. Thanks for answering my question.