I assume young, naive, and optimistic. (There's a humor element here, in that niplav is referencing a snowclone, afaik originating in this tweet which went "My neighbor told me coyotes keep eating his outdoor cats so I asked how many cats he has and he said he just goes to the shelter and gets a new cat afterwards so I said it sounds like he’s just feeding shelter cats to coyotes and then his daughter started crying.", so it may have been added to make the cadence more similar to the original tweet's).

Your grievance with your former employer seems to me to have little relevance to how would-be college students should plan to spend their time, and even if it had, you haven't shared enough detail for people to judge your report as accurate (assuming this is in fact the case).

His lack of reply probably means he doesn't want to engage with you, likely due to what he described as "your combative and sensationalistic attitude."

This is directionally correct and most lesswrongers could probably benefit from taking the advice herein, but goes too far (possibly as deliberate humor? The section about Flynn especially was quite funny XD).

I do take issue with the technical-truths section; I think using technical truths to trick people, while indeed a form of lying, is quite distinct from qualifying claims which would be false if unqualified. It's true that some philistines skim texts in order to respond to vibes rather than content, but the typical reader understands qualifiers to be part of the sentences which contain them, and to affect their meaning. That is why qualifiers exist, to change the meanings of the things they qualify, and choosing to ignore their presence is a choice to ignore the actual meaning of the sentences you're ostensibly reading.

There's an easy way to avoid competition for a restricted pool of elite slots: some students could go to less competitive schools.

Sorry, I meant to change only the headings you didn't want (but that won't work for text that's already paragraph-style, so I suppose that wouldn't fix the bold issue in any case; I apologize for mixing things up!).

Testing it out in a draft, it seems like having paragraph breaks before and after a single line of bold text might be what triggers index inclusion? In which case you can likely remove the offending entries by replacing the preceding or subsequent paragraph break with a shift-enter (still hacky, but at least addressing the right problem this time XD).

A relatively easy solution (which would, unfortunately, mess with your formatting; not sure if there's a better one that doesn't do that) might be to convert everything you don't want in there to paragraph style instead of heading 1/2/3

I'm not sure the deletions are a learnt behavior—base models, or at least llama 405b in particular, do this too IME (as does the fine-tuned 8b version).

And I think you believe others to experience this extra thing because you have failed to understand what they're talking about when they discuss qualia.

Ziz believes her entire hemisphere theory is an infohazard (IIRC she believes it was partially responsible for Pasek's death), so terms pertaining to it are separate from the rest of her glossary.