= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
army1987 comments on Open thread, 21-27 April 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (346)
Agreed, but...
Nope. Sometimes otherwise-okay people make moronic arguments because they're mind-killed, they're tired, etc.
THE WHOLE POINT OF DOWNVOTES IS TO HAVE LESS BAD STUFF AND MORE GOOD STUFF. This applies not just to making people leave but making people who stay post tbings of higher quality.
If you don't downvote "otherwise-okay" people when they say dumb shit, how are they supposed to learn. Downvote the comment, not the person .
Er... That was my point.
I think the point is that you shouldn't conclude "that you're confident you don't want this person in our community" just because "the argument is so moronic".
(Because there's too much noise with individual arguments to deduce a person's general competence.)
In other words, yes, downvote the comment - not the person.
This is exactly why you shouldn't downvote such comments: they hurt good people and discourage them from participating in the community. Also, consider the possibility your own judgement is affected by tiredness or mind-murder.
I guess you are talking of conditions in which someone makes a downvoting decision. But then underconfidence is also possible, and also a pathology, making one unable to act on a correct judgement. This point might be a reason that The Sin of Underconfidence is a prerequisite for Well-Kept Gardens Die By Pacifism.
I agree that both overconfidence and underconfidence is possible, but the potential damage from downvoting is larger than the potential damage from not downvoting. Therefore, let's err on the side of not downvoting.