I see that this is much lower than the last time I looked, so it’s had some, probably large, downvotes.
A downvote means “please don’t write posts like this, and don’t read this post”.
Daniel Kokatijlo disagreed with this post, but found it worth engaging with. Don’t you want discussions with those you disagree with? Downvoting things you don’t agree with says “we are here to preach to the choir. Dissenting opinions are not welcome. Don’t post until you’ve read everything on this topic”. That’s a way to find yourself in an echo chamber. And that’s not going to save the world or pursue truth.
I largely disagree with the conclusions and even the analytical approach taken here, but that does not make this post net-negative. It is net-positive. It could be argued that there are better posts on this topic one should read, but there certainly haven’t been this week. And I haven’t heard these same points made more cogently elsewhere. This is net-positive unless I’m misunderstanding the criteria for a downvote.
I’m confused why we don’t have a “disagree” vote on top-level posts to draw off the inarticulate disgruntlement that causes people to downvote high-effort, well-done work.
I was down voting this particular post because I perceived it as mostly ideological and making few arguments, only stating strongly that government action will be bad. I found the author’s replies in the comments much more nuanced and would not have down-voted if I’d perceived the original post to be of the same quality.
Who is downvoting posts like this? Please don’t!
I see that this is much lower than the last time I looked, so it’s had some, probably large, downvotes.
A downvote means “please don’t write posts like this, and don’t read this post”.
Daniel Kokatijlo disagreed with this post, but found it worth engaging with. Don’t you want discussions with those you disagree with? Downvoting things you don’t agree with says “we are here to preach to the choir. Dissenting opinions are not welcome. Don’t post until you’ve read everything on this topic”. That’s a way to find yourself in an echo chamber. And that’s not going to save the world or pursue truth.
I largely disagree with the conclusions and even the analytical approach taken here, but that does not make this post net-negative. It is net-positive. It could be argued that there are better posts on this topic one should read, but there certainly haven’t been this week. And I haven’t heard these same points made more cogently elsewhere. This is net-positive unless I’m misunderstanding the criteria for a downvote.
I’m confused why we don’t have a “disagree” vote on top-level posts to draw off the inarticulate disgruntlement that causes people to downvote high-effort, well-done work.
I was down voting this particular post because I perceived it as mostly ideological and making few arguments, only stating strongly that government action will be bad. I found the author’s replies in the comments much more nuanced and would not have down-voted if I’d perceived the original post to be of the same quality.