Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: skeptical_lurker 08 October 2015 11:44:58AM 2 points [-]

Well children are both less intelligent than adults, and non-autonomous, in that they have no choice over whether they go to school etc., so I think my comparison still stands.

I also don't think that someone or some group having below-average intelligence means they are sub-human.

Also, does AA think that women have less general intelligence, or that they are less good specifically at STEM subjects? Because a lot of scientists do think that there are cognitive differences, but balanced, in that women have higher verbal & empathising intelligence.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 03:42:27PM 0 points [-]

I don't remember aa saying anything one way or the other about women's intelligence vs. men's.

Comment author: Viliam 08 October 2015 07:19:01AM *  1 point [-]

I think I disagree with the idea that a comment deserves a specific number of votes.

Comment karma is "the number of people who liked it, and cared enough to click the button, minus the number of people who disliked it, and cared enough to click the button".

What does it mean to say that a comment deserves that the result should be e.g. five? Downvoting a comment strategically is like saying "this is a nice comment, but it doesn't deserve more than five people to like it; and because six people said they like it, I am saying that I dislike it, just so that it gets the result it deserves".

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 03:39:14PM *  0 points [-]

It might be worth a poll to find out whether people think posts "deserve" a certain number (or number in a small range) of comments.

I'm not sure that sort of voting makes sense, but I do a little of it myself. I'm guessing that "justice" based voting stabilizes the value of karma, and otherwise it would take increasingly high numbers of votes to indicate that a post is unusually good.

Comment author: Lumifer 08 October 2015 03:16:51PM 0 points [-]



(all caps in the original X-D)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 03:35:14PM 2 points [-]

The usual caveats about small and culturally limited studies apply, not to mention that it's a hypothetical behavior study.

This being said, it's worth noting that a lot of mating venues have so much background noise that conversation is discouraged.

Comment author: ChristianKl 08 October 2015 09:42:01AM 2 points [-]

I'm not sure that I know what's meant with "less tyranny".

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 03:27:49PM 1 point [-]

Some governments are more abusive than others, and governments which are very abusive tend not to be democracies.

Comment author: ooo 08 October 2015 01:27:11PM 3 points [-]

I'm somewhat glad for aa's ban. I've lurked LW for a while now, and have found a lot of content posted here extremely interesting. Seeing aa's posts in open threads on incels every week being upvoted, containing content I felt was extremely prejudiced and malformed, with no apparent improvement over time, unnerved me quite a bit, and I felt like I was not only wasting my time reading his posts, but also gave me a negative impression of what LWers think. This was enough to stop me from browsing open-threads/browsing less wrong for a while.

Not being a constant user of LW, I was unaware of vote manipulation, but I did feel myself being confused by the apparent clash between aa's upvoted posts on incels and general concept I had of LW, so it shouldn't have been hard to conclude that there were alternative explanations for his upvotes.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 03:26:12PM 3 points [-]

I'm inclined to think there were some actual people who liked what aa was saying. They're a small proportion of LW, and there were a good many more people who didn't like what he was saying.

Comment author: ChristianKl 07 October 2015 10:04:50PM 1 point [-]

Democracy is a quite deceptive word. 74% of Egyptians want Egypt to be ruled via the Sharia.

Did the NYT narrative have Egyptians suddenly stoning homosexuals which a majority of that country believes, or did it have the new government not representing the views of the Egyptian population?

As far as I remember not really. It had the idea that western democracy with people who value western value suddenly came to Egypt without really thinking it through.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 07:04:42AM 1 point [-]

"Less tyranny" isn't the same thing as "more democracy".

Comment author: MattG 07 October 2015 06:55:52PM 2 points [-]

But a rule like "don't ban people for opinions you disagree with" would also fit the bill, no?

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 07:03:38AM 0 points [-]

It would, and I was following it for a while.

Comment author: Lumifer 07 October 2015 03:18:53PM 3 points [-]

The interesting question is how did you decide the Arab Spring was a good thing.

Was it because the New York Times told you so? Or was it a consequence of the prior that "More democracy is always good?"

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 07 October 2015 06:55:29PM 1 point [-]

There may have been some influence from the NYT, but it was also less tyranny as well as more democracy.

Comment author: MattG 07 October 2015 04:19:04PM 3 points [-]

What deontological rule did you have in mind?

Freedom of Speech seems most obvious.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 07 October 2015 06:54:09PM 3 points [-]

I was expecting a rule like bans should be preceded by a warning and a chance to reply.

Comment author: bogus 07 October 2015 03:39:19PM *  0 points [-]

Well, I can't speak for the whole incel subculture, but I'm pretty sure I meant what I wrote above. Of course, the point of changing societal attitudes is that once you stop telling women that they're supposed to hate "toxic" masculinity, their attitudes will improve as well. But that's pretty much obvious.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 07 October 2015 06:51:47PM 4 points [-]

No problem-- I was reacting aa's complaints that women are too picky about men, and also revolted by men.

A lot of this discussion has convinced me that communication is difficult.

View more: Next