Dealing with meta-discussion and the signal to noise ratio
Meta-discussion is nasty. Allegedly, troll-feeding was flooding the comments. Verifiably, meta-discussion is flooding the comments. Keep it simple stupid!
Loading…
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
Meta-discussion is nasty. Allegedly, troll-feeding was flooding the comments. Verifiably, meta-discussion is flooding the comments. Keep it simple stupid!
Comments (25)
Yo dawg we heard you like signaling so we put some signaling in your signaling so you can make noise while you make noise.
Will Newsome, stop being so funny and charming while I'm trying to disagree with you.
Sorry but I have a girlfriend.
My girlfriend was partially responsible for that comment.
She's not into all the polyamory going on around here?
Honestly, she thinks polyamory among nerds who don't know the subtleties of more complex relationships and the possibilities thereof is somewhat contemptible; honestly, I agree with her. This is a nontrivial part of what disgusts me about LessWrong and its terrible excuse for a culture.
I like to make things explicit sometimes.
Although rarely.
For example, I wish you'd be more explicit about your disillusionment with LW culture. A few months ago, you were a loyal oppositionist, advising LW on how it can get bigger, while cheering Yudkowsky when he autocratically manipulated the placement of discussion items.
Remember? You advocated for contrarianism; I (or an alter) advocated for dissent. And now, you've become the dissent I advocated if not in content at least in form.
[...]
— Julius Evola, Ride the Tiger
If I can try to get you to be more specific--was it perhaps something you recently learned about LW "culture"? Such as was contained in a recently published expose?
I was turned off too.
I was a Visiting Fellow at SingInst for about two years—I know way more about it than can be found in that article. The reason for the change in my strategies is simply that I learned that I can have most of my comments downvoted while still reaching a good fraction of the more interesting people on LessWrong. It's been a long time since I've cared about LessWrong as a community, I'm only here to interact with the interesting folk. LessWrong is still a hub for them. Even Nick Szabo's been stopping by recently.
Is there someone just going along downvoting you and every reply to you, or is everything I'm saying horrible?
I strongly suspect that it is the former; there is increasingly a community norm against replying to trolls.
I appreciate the info. When did Will_Newsome go from being the cheeky contrarian to a full-on troll in this community? I'm not saying he is or isn't, but his karma indicates that at least at some point he was saying things people found useful.
Around June-July 2011.
(This comment was made possible by Wei Dai)
I think that the polyamorists might be setting themselves up for some unfortunate social or psychological effects in the long run, but I don't think there's anything contemptible about trying to make love work in whatever way makes the most sense to you.
Out of curiosity, was it you downvoting me, or someone annoyed at me encouraging all the noise you make in our signal? Or someone who just doesn't find you funny?
I never downvote.
Love your enemies, upvote them that downvote you, reply in good faith to them that reply with stupid retorts to you, and ironically pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
That ye may be the children of your trollish Father which is meta: for he maketh his sun to rise on the gay and on the meta and sendeth trolling on the just and on the unjust.
What is this I don't even.
Test
Edit: Evidently karma loss only applies to downvoted comments, and not downvoted threads.
Thanks Xachariah, this question had occurred to me also, it's nice to see that someone else already took the risk.