TheOtherDave comments on Self-serving meta: Whoever keeps block-downvoting me, is there some way to negotiate peace? - Less Wrong

16 Post author: ialdabaoth 16 November 2013 04:35AM

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

Comments (281)

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

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 15 May 2014 04:54:56PM 0 points [-]

The objection is to using "do not want to hear" as a criterion for downvotting, as a matter of board policy, not as an individual tactic. If posters were encouraged to think about how well argued and factual posts are instead observing which way their knees jerked, they would be practicing rationality as they go along, to name but one missed opportunity.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 15 May 2014 06:13:09PM 1 point [-]

I endorse "downvote what you want less of" as a matter of board policy.

If individuals want less of things they ought to want more of, I endorse opposing the incorrect values of those individuals.

Those are two separate claims, and I oppose entangling them into a single claim, and also oppose further entangling them with "yay rationality! boo bias!" cheerleading.

Comment author: Dan_Moore 15 May 2014 08:25:49PM 0 points [-]

If individuals want less of things they ought to want more of, I endorse opposing the incorrect values of those individuals.

Downvoted per your request.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 15 May 2014 07:25:54PM *  -1 points [-]

Oh good grief! Opposition to bias is a bias ... and transparent is a colour.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 15 May 2014 07:37:13PM 0 points [-]

I agree with what seems to be your point that opposition to bias isn't a bias.

I have no idea how it connects to anything I said.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 15 May 2014 07:43:20PM -1 points [-]

Yay rationality, boo bias.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 16 May 2014 12:14:24AM 0 points [-]

Yes, I (implicitly) described you as cheerleading for that stance.
And I oppose entangling such cheerleading with making substantive claims, as I said.
What does that have to do with opposition to bias not being a bias?
(Which, again, I agree that it isn't, I'm just not following your point. If you're not interested in explaining yourself further, that's fine too, we can drop it here.)

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 16 May 2014 05:07:07PM -2 points [-]

Aren't we all supporting that state here?

Comment author: TheOtherDave 16 May 2014 08:29:18PM 1 point [-]

I'm not sure which "state" you're talking about. You seem to be being deliberately obscure, and I no longer have any confidence that we're at all able to communicate, and am now recalling that this was true the last time we interacted as well. Tapping out here.