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.

fang2d2 comments on Ontologial Reductionism and Invisible Dragons - Less Wrong Discussion

-11 Post author: Balofsky 20 March 2012 02:29AM

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

Comments (80)

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

Comment author: fang2d2 22 March 2012 04:05:38AM -1 points [-]

I suppose my reply might have been better directed at the post you were in turn replying to, but your post added to what that person said.

You at least had other things to say about the author's argument elsewhere, but wedrifid commented on nothing but the fonts, thus implying that the formatting invalidated everything else the author said.

Comment author: pedanterrific 22 March 2012 04:09:23AM 2 points [-]

wedrifid can of course speak for himself, but I have to say I inferred no such implication. It seems rather more likely that he just had better things to do than address everything else the author said.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 23 March 2012 07:14:32PM 1 point [-]

That's almost how I read his and your comments-- not just better things to do, but a desire to snipe, or in LessWrongian language, to lower status.

Comment author: pedanterrific 23 March 2012 07:24:36PM *  2 points [-]

Well, I can't swear to unconscious motives, but for me the problem was that every time I scrolled through the latest comments page and saw "in response to Ontologial Reductionism" I felt a dust speck fly into my eyeball. Even so, I wouldn't have said anything if there hadn't already been a comment on the formatting.

But thank you for informing me, I'll try to bear that in mind for the future.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 23 March 2012 07:34:58PM 0 points [-]

I don't think I'd have seen your comment as hostile if it had been a direct reply to the post. In that case, it would have looked like helpful proof-reading.

Comment author: pedanterrific 23 March 2012 07:50:30PM 2 points [-]

Huh. Thinking about it, I can see your point of view, but when I made the decision I had a strong emotional reaction in the other direction- that a top level comment about nothing but nitpicks would be perceived as an attack (which I wanted to avoid). Considering my track record, it would probably be best if I weighted your opinion higher than mine.