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

Comment author: qsz 29 April 2016 03:58:43PM 0 points [-]

Thank you! However, this appears to miss anything that is "Promoted". The only recent example is Free CFAR summer programs, and before that the LW survey. If other posts get promoted they may also get overlooked by browing from Discussion.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 29 April 2016 04:26:20PM 0 points [-]

Main is still a separate section, even there isn't much happening there.

You can get new posts in Main from http://lesswrong.com/new/

There may not be a convenient way of tracking new comments on non-promoted posts in Main.

Comment author: qsz 29 April 2016 02:20:51PM *  1 point [-]

Like a number of people I browse LW by using the "recentposts" URL to avoid missing anything new. However in the sidebar it appears that "recent comments" and "recent posts" only seem to show those in Main/Promoted. With the move away from the use of Main, does this need to be fixed? Or is it not worth the effort given dwindling comment levels here and the eventual shift to a LW2.0?

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 29 April 2016 02:33:41PM 0 points [-]

If you start from the Discussion page, you'll get the recent posts and recent comments for Discussion.

Comment author: ChristianKl 28 April 2016 06:24:10PM -1 points [-]

For some reason both your post and gjm got downvoted. Being able to see who cast the downvote might very well be a way to identify further downvotes.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 28 April 2016 06:28:08PM -2 points [-]

I've contacted support about this. Thanks for the heads-up. I caught that one myself, but that doesn't mean I'll catch all of them.

Comment author: gjm 28 April 2016 01:30:40PM *  -2 points [-]
Comment author: NancyLebovitz 28 April 2016 04:18:32PM 0 points [-]

Thanks. Banned. I'd already caught the first, but not the second.

Comment author: Viliam 28 April 2016 10:51:54AM 0 points [-]

Another spammer here.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 28 April 2016 04:17:58PM 1 point [-]

Thanks, Banned.

Comment author: Brillyant 26 April 2016 06:59:00PM 2 points [-]

What if his fourth strategy is to get all the people on Less Wrong to talk about Eugine Noir more than anything else thereby allowing his ideas to get notoriety?

I would never have paid attention to his comments sans the furor. As it is, I find myself interested in what views he has and why LW is so opposed to them.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 28 April 2016 04:11:01PM 0 points [-]

The problem isn't just that talking about Nier might promulgate his ideas. It's that talking about him means not talking about anything more important and/or interesting.

Comment author: Furcas 26 April 2016 03:04:13PM 0 points [-]

Do you already have something written on the subject? I'd like to read it.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 April 2016 04:58:12PM 0 points [-]

No. It would probably be worth doing but difficult, since evaluating truth or at least plausibility depends on a complex web of assumptions.

Comment author: gjm 26 April 2016 12:18:18AM *  2 points [-]

sight2 too, now.

[EDITED to add:] And vision2 and flame2.

I have just done something I have never done before, not even to Eugine: I have downvoted all the comments by sight2, vision2 and flame2. They were mostly reposts of comments posted by other Eugine alters and deleted by the moderators. They were all, curiously enough, on +1 despite being only very recently posted. Eugine is banned from LW, these accounts are a big fuck-you to the moderators and the LW community, and I warmly endorse vigorous vigilante action against them. (Note that while an account is below +10 karma it is unable to downvote.)

[EDITED to add:] ... And, oh look, all those comments are now mysteriously back to +1.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 April 2016 01:42:53AM 0 points [-]

Sight2, vision2, and flame2 have been banned.

Banning their comments leaves the comments visible to mods, so evidence isn't destroyed.

Tech support is volunteer, and they've volunteered to do support but not development. Perhaps the ability to reverse karma from trolls will be available when LW 2.0 happens.

Comment author: Viliam 25 April 2016 08:38:50AM 2 points [-]

Let's be successful? Sure, let's. But it has nothing to do with non-conformity.

Let's be successful through cooperation, which conformity is an ingredient of.

For people to cooperate, they have to agree on the project they cooperate on, and also agree on the general strategy to accomplish this project. With perfect Bayesian reasoners, the agreement would be achieved by Aumann's Theorem. With humans, certain doze of conformity is required to overcome the remaining differences in opinion remaining after people have already updated on each other's opinions.

If you can't do this last step, you get Mensa. Nothing ever gets done, because everyone has a different opinion, and everyone feels it would be low-status to accept someone else's solution when it is obviously imperfect (therefore it wouldn't be accepted on basis of pure logic).

As an example, a few years ago, when I had much more free time, I was active in two societies: Mensa, and a local Esperanto group.

In the Esperanto group, as a team of five or ten people we succeeded to publish a new textbook, a multi-media CD (containing books, songs, and computer programs in E-o) and later a larger DVD edition (with added E-o courses, and an offline version of E-o Wikipedia), and created a website containing a wiki and a forum; all this within two years. (Later I decided that E-o isn't my high priority anymore, so I quit the team. As far as I know, the remaining members now use their skills for some commercial projects related to learning languages other than E-o, plus organize international E-o meetups.)

During the same time in Mensa... generally, whenever I suggested anything, it was almost certainly rejected; and even when by miracle people finally agreed about something, when we looked at the details, the same pattern repeated on the lower level. It was a fractal of nitpicking. At the end, nothing got done. We succeeded to agree that we ought to change our web forum, because it had no moderation and was dominated by a few prolific crackpots (who weren't even our members). But during two years we were unable to agree on which software solution to use, and what specific rules should the new forum have.

I spent about the same amount of energy in both groups, and the difference in outcome was staggering. This is how I learned that productivity is a two-place word: how much I am productive is a function of both my personal traits and the traits of the environment I am trying to work in. When you have people who second-guess everything but contribute nothing, the output is close to zero. When you have people who can go along with your crazy experiments, some of those experiements succeed, and a few of them will be really impressive. (But going along with something that you have a different opinion about, that's conformity.)

When programming, you have the option to do the whole thing yourself, and then you don't need to cooperate with anyone. But even that applies to specific kinds of projects, where you can become an expert at every relevant aspect. (For example, if you make a computer game, it is unlikely for the same person to be great at coding and graphics and music and level design and balancing multiplayer.) But when you look at the real world, you have basically two options: either cooperate with non-nerds, or find nerds who are able to cooperate.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 25 April 2016 03:31:59PM 0 points [-]

My first thought is that it's easier to get things done in an Esperanto group because the goal-- spread Esperanto-- is more obvious than what a Mensa group should do, but perhaps I'm underestimating how much is obvious for a Mensa group to do.

I was a member of Mensa for a while, but was underwhelmed by the intellectual quality. I know a couple of very smart people who are or were in Mensa, but they weren't local to me. I've been told that there's a lot of variation between local groups.

There's a pattern I saw in local Mensa publications that I now have filed under people trying to appear intelligent. The article starts with a bunch of definitions that don't look obviously awful, but which somehow lead to a preferred conclusion.

Comment author: gjm 25 April 2016 10:36:04AM 1 point [-]

I'm pretty sure the new users flame (p=0.8) and torch2 (p=0.9) are both Eugine.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 25 April 2016 02:01:07PM 3 points [-]

I've already banned them and their comments.

View more: Next