= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JoshuaZ comments on Open thread, Jan. 26 - Feb. 1, 2015 - 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 (431)
First: Indeed, Eugene violated civilized norms, and was booted. What a strange coincidence that it was an unprogressive fellow that got booted. That's as much evidence for my thesis as against.
Second: Ah, so AA saying that people should attend to their game is being "overly political". Seems a stretch. I guess for some people everything is political, but if so, complaining that a post is political makes little sense.
Third: I thought voting a person down was a no no. That was what made Eugine's downvoting a crime, no? I thought we were supposed to be downvoting a post based on it's own content. I note that the response I received "I would like him to shut up and go away" in justification of the downvoting. Where are the villagers and their pitchforks calling for banning the miscreant?
Your certainty is misplaced. I was involved in exactly the kind of case you posit, where someone basically cast conservatives as in league with Lucifer, and he was upvoted to the moon. When I called him on it, I was downvoted to oblivion. He had the decency to engage the issue, and eventually agreed that he had unfairly maligned conservatives, and hadn't really realized he had done it at the time. Would you be so surprised if you had been one of the people upvoting his original post with it's slur against conservatives?
Fourth: "comment's quality and general politics made it not good content."
As for the quality, it was the clear expression of an idea relevant to winning that you don't hear so often. I call it a good point. It is the Open Thread after all. I don't expect dissertations here.
As for the "general politics" - what would that be? It's political to suggest that your interpersonal skills have a large effect on your life, so you should see about getting good at them? We shouldn't talk about interpersonal skills?
In what universe? Are you claiming that Eugine got booted by what? The evil cabal of moderators who want to push left-wing politics?
But if you want, I'll make a fun related prediction: Within 3 months you'll agree with me that AA has been violating community norms. What do you want to bet on that?
Don't be daft. Making claims like he did falls flatly into PUA and neoreactionary claims. Moreover, the phrasing was political.
No. The problem with Eugine was he was a) repeatedly downvoting people's comments which had nothing to do with anything to do with politics or controversial issues. For crying out loud, he was downvoting meetup announcements posted by people. b) he was using sockpuppets to get the karma to do it. (Note that for example, I've downvoted two of advanceatheist's recent comments but not most of them, and upvoted one of the less political ones).
Link?
Really? I could imagine much clearer and much more steelmanned, and frankly more interesting versions of the same idea. I can easily supply them if you want.
No. But it is politics to claim that interpersonal skills are intrinsically involved in issues of sex and gender, that those issues always come up in the way that he described and the like.