albeola comments on Configurations and Amplitude - Less Wrong

26 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 10 April 2008 07:41AM

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

Comments (375)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: albeola 09 May 2012 02:53:48AM 1 point [-]

Comments in the sidebar tend to be too new to have been voted below -3 or whatever the threshold is.

Comment author: komponisto 09 May 2012 02:57:34AM 0 points [-]

One could make the sidebar-threshold lower than the ordinary threshold....

Comment author: albeola 09 May 2012 02:58:33AM *  0 points [-]

True, but it would discriminate less well. It would hide many OK comments that happened to be downvoted once or twice.

Note that for this solution to be an argument against the banning solution, it would need to actually be implemented. Are you predicting that will happen?

Comment author: komponisto 09 May 2012 03:03:49AM 2 points [-]

I'm saying it ought to be done, if the problem is as described. Or, in other words, that I prefer such a solution over the alternative being proposed (moderator intervention to remove comments).

Comment author: albeola 09 May 2012 03:08:24AM *  0 points [-]

So you're not saying that you prefer no banning to banning (given whatever you predict will actually happen to the sidebar)?

Comment author: komponisto 09 May 2012 03:09:27AM 0 points [-]

I thought I was saying that.

Comment author: albeola 09 May 2012 03:11:03AM *  0 points [-]

Preferring sidebar change to banning does not imply preferring no banning to banning given actual probability of sidebar change. Do you agree?

Comment author: komponisto 09 May 2012 03:15:04AM 0 points [-]

Actual probability of sidebar change is, I would hope, dependent on such preferences.

Comment author: albeola 09 May 2012 03:53:25AM *  0 points [-]

There are some corpses in the street. Some people are proposing to bury them, because they'll rot and cause diseases. Others are proposing to leave them there, because haha, corpses. In this situation, you may prefer cryopreservation to burial and at the same time prefer burial to non-burial, because cryo probably won't happen. (Maybe this is an insane alien hypothetical world where cryo is just really unpopular.) If you're facing a "bury yes or no" button, it may well be rational to push yes. This is true even though the probability of cryopreservation depends on your preferences. Now substitute bad commenters for corpses, banning for burial, and sidebar change for cryo. I'm not saying the parameter values are the same, but do you agree with the qualitative point?

Comment author: komponisto 09 May 2012 05:13:20AM 0 points [-]

I agree with the qualitative point but think it irrelevant. Not only are we not facing a "yes or no" button, but all that you claim in the above is that it "may well be rational to push yes" (emphasis added) in the event that we are faced with such a button. This says very little.

Again, I reiterate the point made in the grandparent. A hypothetical about a yes-or-no button is no answer to someone specifically advocating a third alternative. If you don't think the third alternative is possible, argue against it directly; don't pretend it was never proposed.