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.

Michaelos comments on [META] Retributive downvoting: Why? - Less Wrong Discussion

12 Post author: ialdabaoth 27 November 2012 02:24AM

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

Comments (110)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 27 November 2012 08:32:04PM *  0 points [-]

You could always ask for two entirely separate friends to BOTH review your work and have them not know who the other friend is (or for that matter, even that there WAS another friend reviewing your work, if needed.) They wouldn't be able to easily form an echo chamber because they would not be in communication with each other.

Alternatively, you could, if you really wanted to avoid an echo chamber, explicitly ask Poster A "Can you review this with the intent of finding flaws? Crocker's rules apply, be as harsh as you like." and Poster B "Can you review this with the intent of finding good points?" It does not seem like that approach could form anything remotely like what I would consider an echo chamber.

Comment author: TimS 27 November 2012 08:46:46PM 1 point [-]

That's asking a fair amount from people I only know over the Internet. I could count on one hand the number of people that I expect a >50% chance of response (even refusal) if I asked them for this kind of help on this site.

And I'm not sure anything is wrong with that.

Comment author: [deleted] 27 November 2012 09:58:01PM 0 points [-]

That's asking a fair amount from people I only know over the Internet. I could count on one hand the number of people that I expect a >50% chance of response (even refusal) if I asked them for this kind of help on this site.

I, or another person, would appear to be volunteering reading and offering relatively unskilled commentary on short blurbs of rationality related text. I know I personally already do that for fun when I post here, I just somewhat randomly select which items to reply to. This would essentially be what I would already be doing except people would be sending me what to read, so it doesn't seem to be a lot of work for me at all, unless the response was unexpectedly massive.

I guess what I am considering is like Jsalvatier's help desk at http://lesswrong.com/lw/eto/lesswrong_help_desk_free_paper_downloads_and_more/ but at a lower level for people who have simple questions like "Why was this downvoted?"

And I'm not sure anything is wrong with that.

Can you go into more detail?