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.

OrphanWilde comments on Dark Arts: Defense in Reputational Warfare - Less Wrong Discussion

1 Post author: OrphanWilde 03 December 2015 03:03PM

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

Comments (69)

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

Comment author: OrphanWilde 04 December 2015 02:07:01PM 0 points [-]

They will and have. Look what happened to Larry Summers, Brendan Eich, or James Watson. In all cases issuing an apology didn't help them and lead directly to resignations. Heck look at the reaction of the University protestors to admissions of guild and apologies on the part of university administrators. Heck look who Christakis's apology failed to stop the events.

Ah. I see.

I'm not advocating an apology; that is playing the game according to the rules your opponents have set. I'm advocating -redefining- the game by changing what it is you have to apologize for. An example that is now recognized as such, and thus is no longer useful, is apologizing for the way what you said was received.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 05 December 2015 02:11:53AM 1 point [-]

An example that is now recognized as such, and thus is no longer useful, is apologizing for the way what you said was received.

The problem is that any apology is now recognized as such.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 05 December 2015 04:38:21PM -1 points [-]

While I disagree, I still don't advocate apologizing.