Why is frame control central to this post? While it explains frame control well, the focus seems to be about people consciously/unconsciously harmfully manipulating one another. How to avoid being manipulated, gaslighted, deceived, etc is an important topic to discuss and a valuable skill to have. And this post offers good advice on it (whether or not it intended to). But it could’ve done so without bringing up the concept of frame control.

LW 2.0 is a good example of trying to fix something that isn't broken and ending up breaking it further.

Thanks for trying it out. Hermes is still a work in progress and one of our top priorities now is improving responsiveness.

Looking forward to helping you out!

I recently launched a new service called Hermes. It connects users with dating experts for live texting advice. It runs on a unique platform designed to greatly simplify sharing and discussing text conversations. Since modern dating is changing so rapidly, especially with the rise of online dating apps and a growing population of young people glued to their phones, helping people improve their texting can greatly improve their dating life. I've been a software developer and dating coach for over 10 years so this is sort of my passion project.

I'd be happy to get some trial users. General feedback is greatly appreciated too.

In the case of voting for Trump and writing the note in the Wailing Wall, I think there's little to no risk of having it change your prior beliefs or weaken your self-deception defense mechanisms. They both require you to be dishonest about something that clashes with so many other strong beliefs that it's highly unlikely to contaminate your belief system. The more dangerous lies are the ones that don't clash as much with your other beliefs.

How's that related?

Inter alia, yes. But the step from "rationality is supposed to reduce X" to "I will act as if X has been reduced to negligibility" is not a valid one.

Well, isn't that a good technique to reduce X? Obviously not in all cases, but I think it's a valid technique in the cases we're talking about.

If you value your belief that's there are no ghost then it's irrational to be scared by ghosts.

Are you talking about "real" ghosts? You shouldn't be afraid of real ghosts because they don't exist, not because you value your belief that there are no ghosts. Why should beliefs have any value for you beyond their accuracy?

Funny you mention that anecdote because I actually wrote it http://lesswrong.com/lw/1l/the_mystery_of_the_haunted_rationalist/w9

Human brains aren't very good at detaching themselves from their actions

Isn't that what rationality is supposed to reduce?

The government picks arbitrary ages for when an individual has the mental capacity to make certain decisions, like drinking alcohol or having sex. But not everyone mentally matures at the same rate. It'd be nice to have an institution that allows minors with good backgrounds and who pass certain intelligence/rationality tests to be exempt from these laws.