As I realize, this community seems trapped in downvoting, making it easy to judge without prioritizing intellectual arguments, except for limited responses or subjective criticisms.
It’s the evident from the overly sensitive downvoting due to capslock …
It’s the evident from the non-objective response, ‘Speaking for myself? you’re talking to yourself’? (You’re not talking to yourself)
It’s the evident from merely protesting without pinpointing the objection, indicating subjective dissatisfaction that cannot be understood objectively at all?
Is it evident from seeking justification like someono said” ‘others will downvote’? (how strong provoking)
I think ‘lesswrong’ reflects ‘tolerance’ (a bit wrong). Or ‘hugewrong’ (lots of subjectivity, little objectivity)?
Well, I think there’s a change; apparently, it only discusses common things and rejects new thought concepts with a spirit of downvoting but fears absolute argumentation.
I won’t respond to your next comment.
And a suggestion for ‘lesswrong.’ You’re not different from other intellectual communities that see ‘downvoting’ as a way to set quality standards.
You don’t have a simple concept to show argument quality without going through public opinion. This makes it no different from LLM, which seems argumentative but is actually at risk of huge collectiion of ambiguous quality judgment, based on un-objective reply and afraid of facing absolute rebuttal.
I thought this is a community that emphasizes quality based on absolute truth standards? OR? ARE YOU LESSWRONG NOT UNDERSTANDING DISCUSSION QUALITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ABSOLUTENESS? JUST PUBLIC OPINION?
Feel free to delete this comment to protect your privacy?
My suggestion: dare to make a gradual, absolute rebuttal, for days or months. Unless you didn’t know what absolute rebuttal is or thought it’s impossible.
I want to see how much i can increase my downvoting and my karma as a new record. My suggestion to all of you: don’t trust public opinion.
Currently at −14 downvoting. If, over time, these downvotes stop, that means you realize you need to reconsider your position (judgement). But if the downvoting increases, it’s true that there’s no absolute rebuttal, just less hasty—huge wrong.
Speaking for myself, if this article makes any sense at all, you did a bad job communicating the idea. I can’t argue against an idea, if I do not understand what the idea is, or even whether there actually is an idea.
It’s not the job of the platform to figure out what a difficult to understand post means; it’s the job of the author to make sure the post is understandable (and relevant and insightful).
I don’t understand what the post is trying to say (and I’m also appalled by the capslock in the title). That’s more than enough reason to downvote, which I would have done if I hadn’t figured that enough other people would do so, anyway.
i want to explain the foundation of cause and effect, namely logical consequences, which are not just the commonly known logical consequences that fall into the category of cause and effect.
instead, these are logical consequences that are truly separate from cause and effect because they form the basis.
That’s the essential information. if it’s not fully understood, it’s okay, but at least you grasp that there are ‘logical consequences’ different from the commonly known ones.
As I realize, this community seems trapped in downvoting, making it easy to judge without prioritizing intellectual arguments, except for limited responses or subjective criticisms.
It’s the evident from the overly sensitive downvoting due to capslock …
It’s the evident from the non-objective response, ‘Speaking for myself? you’re talking to yourself’? (You’re not talking to yourself)
It’s the evident from merely protesting without pinpointing the objection, indicating subjective dissatisfaction that cannot be understood objectively at all?
Is it evident from seeking justification like someono said” ‘others will downvote’? (how strong provoking)
I think ‘lesswrong’ reflects ‘tolerance’ (a bit wrong). Or ‘hugewrong’ (lots of subjectivity, little objectivity)?
Well, I think there’s a change; apparently, it only discusses common things and rejects new thought concepts with a spirit of downvoting but fears absolute argumentation.
I won’t respond to your next comment.
And a suggestion for ‘lesswrong.’ You’re not different from other intellectual communities that see ‘downvoting’ as a way to set quality standards.
You don’t have a simple concept to show argument quality without going through public opinion. This makes it no different from LLM, which seems argumentative but is actually at risk of huge collectiion of ambiguous quality judgment, based on un-objective reply and afraid of facing absolute rebuttal.
I thought this is a community that emphasizes quality based on absolute truth standards? OR? ARE YOU LESSWRONG NOT UNDERSTANDING DISCUSSION QUALITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ABSOLUTENESS? JUST PUBLIC OPINION?
Feel free to delete this comment to protect your privacy?
My suggestion: dare to make a gradual, absolute rebuttal, for days or months. Unless you didn’t know what absolute rebuttal is or thought it’s impossible.
I want to see how much i can increase my downvoting and my karma as a new record. My suggestion to all of you: don’t trust public opinion.
Currently at −14 downvoting. If, over time, these downvotes stop, that means you realize you need to reconsider your position (judgement). But if the downvoting increases, it’s true that there’s no absolute rebuttal, just less hasty—huge wrong.
In any way you do… wrong!
Ok BYE
Downvoted without explanation, is not a rebuttal at all, not intellectual disagreement but subjective haste 👎
Downvote is a signal “less of this”.
Speaking for myself, if this article makes any sense at all, you did a bad job communicating the idea. I can’t argue against an idea, if I do not understand what the idea is, or even whether there actually is an idea.
“less of this” is true less reply as it should be
you can try to point on specific paragraph or line to discuss it?
if you know the “doesn’t make sense” part of it, then you must be able to show us where those parts.
otherwise there must be wrong communication between us, i don’t know where side
any way objectively, you’re not speaking for yourself, thanks for your comment
we can breakdown our discussion in days or weeks, it is okay to clarify the ambiguous for days, since lesswrong not a get smart quick schemes.
it’s a gradual process. otherwise, this is really “hugewrong” not just lesswrong
It’s not the job of the platform to figure out what a difficult to understand post means; it’s the job of the author to make sure the post is understandable (and relevant and insightful).
I don’t understand what the post is trying to say (and I’m also appalled by the capslock in the title). That’s more than enough reason to downvote, which I would have done if I hadn’t figured that enough other people would do so, anyway.
yes true, not the job for “lesswrong”, but job for ours to reflect “lesswrong” by being patient , less hasty
okay now perhaps we will discuss,
i want to explain the foundation of cause and effect, namely logical consequences, which are not just the commonly known logical consequences that fall into the category of cause and effect.
instead, these are logical consequences that are truly separate from cause and effect because they form the basis.
That’s the essential information. if it’s not fully understood, it’s okay, but at least you grasp that there are ‘logical consequences’ different from the commonly known ones.