You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

waitingforgodel comments on How Greedy Bastards Have Saved More Lives Than Mother Theresa Ever Did - Less Wrong Discussion

14 Post author: waitingforgodel 03 December 2010 06:20AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (24)

Comments (24)

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

Comment author: waitingforgodel 03 December 2010 07:06:39AM 0 points [-]

The idea behind the title is to look interesting enough to read, to a large number of people.

The article's intended readership isn't lesswrong -- see the $100/essay threads for more :)

Comment author: Emile 03 December 2010 09:15:59AM 4 points [-]

The article's intended readership isn't lesswrong -- see the $100/essay threads for more :)

I don't think LessWrongers are the only ones who'll expect Yet Another Rant About How Selfish Entrepreneurial Sprit Does More Good In The World Than Good Intentions ... your post is a bit more original than that.

(I'm a third data point for "expected silly objectivism from the title")

Comment author: waitingforgodel 03 December 2010 10:14:30AM 1 point [-]

"expected silly objectivism from the title" isn't good or bad -- the question is was there a title that would have made more prospects read this....

As long as objectivists also open it... non-objectivists opening it to mock what appears at first glance to be written by a dumb-objectivist is good :p

Comment author: Emile 03 December 2010 11:19:38AM *  5 points [-]

Some people might not even read it (because they assume they already know it's full of ideological drivel saying nothing they haven't heard a dozen times before), or argue against it based on the title and not the contents (which is unfotunately common on the internet).

That being said, I don't mind the essay title that much, I was just chiming in saying "I got that impression too", and somehow found myself arguing for a point I didn't necessarily support in the first place. How did that happen?

A: your title gives impression X!
B: yep, I got impression X too.
C: giving impression X isn't necessarily bad.
B: (has to say something) um, yes it is!

Damn faulty brain. Couldn't it use better criteria for choosing which position to support?

Comment author: sketerpot 05 December 2010 09:08:29PM *  2 points [-]

Some people might not even read it (because they assume they already know it's full of ideological drivel saying nothing they haven't heard a dozen times before), or argue against it based on the title and not the contents (which is unfotunately common on the internet).

I don't dispute that. The real question here is, will the title attract more readers than a more descriptive, less Objectivist-sounding title? I suspect that it will; titles like this are called "linkbait" for a reason.

Comment author: Jack 03 December 2010 08:12:39AM 2 points [-]

The idea behind the title is to look interesting enough to read, to a large number of people.

It does do this but it also primes a lot of people (bleeding heart liberals, in particular) to disagree with what you're about to say.

Comment author: waitingforgodel 03 December 2010 10:17:19AM *  1 point [-]

Fair enough. That's what the subhead/lead story was for (assuming the bleeding heart liberals get unprimed by the saving a life for $600 /// lead-in story).

Better headline & subhead solicited, on the condition it has the same draw

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit