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.

Capla comments on Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary? - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: Capla 17 November 2014 10:31PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (616)

Comments (616)

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

Comment author: Capla 18 November 2014 11:54:24PM 5 points [-]

Online communities are not states with guaranteed freedom of speech.

Yes. I was making a poor analogy. Isn't the value of lesswrong that we are able to explore ideas things that are not admissible elsewhere for lack of interest, lack of training, or direct aversion? (This is obviously contestable. I invite you to contest it.) If the fundamental value of the community is compromised out of concern for its reputation, then the reputation is of increasingly less value.

Comment author: ChristianKl 19 November 2014 02:58:42PM 1 point [-]

Isn't the value of lesswrong that we are able to explore ideas things that are not admissible elsewhere for lack of interest, lack of training, or direct aversion?

If you read the about page, that's not how LW statement of purpose is phrased.

Comment author: Lumifer 19 November 2014 03:36:27PM 3 points [-]

To quote the About page

Unlike some skeptics, Less Wrong users don't automatically reject odd ideas and sometimes endorse them.

Comment author: ChristianKl 19 November 2014 03:50:42PM *  3 points [-]

In this case "automatically" rejection would be a poor description even in the case where NRx is more discouraged.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit