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

NancyLebovitz comments on Help Fund Lukeprog at SIAI - Less Wrong

40 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 24 August 2011 07:16AM

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

Comments (276)

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

Comment author: komponisto 24 August 2011 09:59:43PM 21 points [-]

Because "signing" comments is not customary here, doing so signals a certain aloofness or distance from the community, and thus can easily be interpreted as a passive-aggressive assertion of high status. (Especially coming from Luke, who I find emits such signals rather often -- he may want to be aware of this in case it's not his intention.)

I interpret Silas's "Not necessary" as roughly "Excuse me, but you're not on Mount Olympus writing an epistle to the unwashed masses on LW down below".

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 August 2011 11:23:18AM 1 point [-]

I saw lukeprog's signing messages as minor noise and possibly a finger macro developed long ago, so I stopped seeing the signature.

I'd be dubious about assuming one can be certain (where's the Bayesianism?) about what someone else is intending to signal, especially considering that it's doctrine here that one can't be certain of even one's own motivations. How much less certain should one be about other people's?

I would add some further uncertainty if one feels very sure about the motivation driving a behavior that's annoying.

Comment author: saturn 26 August 2011 04:20:52PM 11 points [-]

I just looked through several pages of lukeprog's most recent comments, and the only ones that were signed were direct replies to SilasBarta.

Comment author: ciphergoth 26 August 2011 04:42:30PM 11 points [-]

Which could just mean that he feels the need to counter hostility with extra friendliess.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 August 2011 04:59:57PM 5 points [-]

That's interesting. Thanks for checking. I still have no idea what lukeprog intended, but my finger macro theory is clearly wrong.

Comment author: lessdazed 26 August 2011 11:34:18AM *  6 points [-]

doing so signals...a passive-aggressive assertion... emits such signals rather often -- he may want to be aware of this in case it's not his intention.

vs.

I'd be dubious about assuming one can be certain (where's the Bayesianism?) about what someone else is intending to signal

I didn't read komponisto as necessarily or primarily talking about consciously intended signals.