= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Hi - I'm new here - some questions - Less Wrong Discussion
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)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (51)
In general, upvotes indicate that somebody wants more of whatever it was, downvotes indicate somebody wants less of it. So if you're not getting downvoted and nobody's giving you flak, you're fine.
Other than that, there's not exactly an etiquette consensus. (Actually, even that much isn't reliable; some people seem to use upvotes/downvotes to indicate agreement/disagreement instead. But they're wrong.)
Editing history is annoying; I'd rather you not do it. Adding "EDIT: Oops; that was a major reasoning flaw" or whatever while leaving the original comment's logic there to be read is AFAIC preferable.
Minimizing clutter is a local value, so pure "Thanks" comments probably won't make you many friends, though it's not a big deal either way.
The evidence suggests that LessWrongians especially want more jokes.
Yeah, and a lot more discussion of Harry Potter fanfic.
(shrug) Revealed preferences are what they are, not what we necessarily would like them to be.
Mostly agree. One note: Thanks comments that are thanking for information or arguments that causes an update of your pre-existing viewpoint are generally regarded as a good thing.
Agreed.
I would generalize this, though: signaling that I've willingly updated probability estimates based on new input is a (local) Good Thing, especially when it involves repudiating beliefs I previously held (rather than just marginal changes to my confidence level), whether I do it in thanks-comments or elsewhere.
Thanks.