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.

Michelle_Z comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 22, chapter 93 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 [deleted] 06 July 2013 03:02AM

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

Comments (354)

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

Comment author: Michelle_Z 06 July 2013 06:34:33PM 2 points [-]

I think it would be prudent to wait until the story is completed to make those kinds of judgements. We simply do not know the intention yet.

Comment author: cody-bryce 07 July 2013 03:08:22PM *  2 points [-]

That's ridiculous.

That only serves to shut down discussion. Not only are analysis based on only part of the work fundamentally valid, they are exceedingly popular at the moment, and they are being participated in by the author. Besides...as Akin's 9th law of spacecraft design states, "Not having all the information you need is never a satisfactory excuse for not starting the analysis."

Comment author: Velorien 07 July 2013 03:44:13PM 9 points [-]

Whether or not I agree with the conclusion, your argument here is weak.

  • Calling an opposing viewpoint ridiculous (with formatting for emphasis, no less) does not advance the discussion. It's just a way of saying "I disagree with you strongly enough to be rude about it".

  • Saying that analyses based on only part of the work are fundamentally valid doesn't automatically make it so. You have to actually justify your claim.

  • Popularity is no indicator of validity.

  • If Eliezer is indeed participating in critical discussions of unfinished works, that might make his objection to having the same done to his own hypocritical, but it still tells you nothing about whether doing so is legitimate or not.

  • You provide no evidence that Akin's laws of spacecraft design are relevant to this discussion. Having Googled them, I can't even imagine how most of them could be relevant here.

I do, however, agree that Michelle's argument can easily be used to shut down discussion, and that this is an issue that needs addressing.

Comment author: Michelle_Z 07 July 2013 05:15:42PM 1 point [-]

Not my intention. I was attempting to say "Don't condemn the work as irredeemably anti-feminist or whatever before it's even finished." I see how I could have been misunderstood, though.

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 09 July 2013 02:06:21AM *  2 points [-]

That would need to be qualified somehow - I don't care what the second volume of the rules of FATAL are, the system as a whole is irredeemably anti-feminist.

I think this may not be a 'fridging' simply because we don't know what role it plays in the story yet. It may be a Damsel In Distress + Girl In The Refrigerator combo, and it may be something else. It could be both a DiD+GitR AND something else. It could subvert or twist the tropes (Hermione helps fake her own death). It could play them straight but make up for it in other ways (as is already happening with Minerva also gaining a level despite not being the typical beneficiary of this trope, but I'm thinking more so).