It’s certainly borderline, in that it is not typical of posts on LessWrong. Absence of similar posts is at least moderate evidence that such posts genuinely do not belong, which is why I proceeded carefully (title, content warning, checking in with LW leadership rather than just assuming it was fine).
But assuming that you are actually asking, and that the question above is not rhetorical:
It is peering into a realm of human interaction and human psychology which is known to contain a lot of craziness; LW is about looking into such corners and trying to understand them and (ambitiously) trying to improve them.
It is a subject taken in rational fashion, i.e. I had a confusion and rather than simply making up my own answer, I went and checked. It models a particular (small instance of) virtue that is in line with LW’s ideals.
It is (as noted in the third bullet of “Why this post?”) a deliberate move in the “raising the sanity waterline” space. People can’t talk reasonably about this subject + here I and my former partners are talking reasonably about this subject = epsilon shift in the Overton window in the right direction.
Strong claims that it is not appropriate (which you did not make; I’m just mentioning them here because it seems relevant) would have to ground out somewhere, and since this is neither explicit nor vulgar, I suspect that most such claims ground out in “sex is just bad, just because” à la religion, which is also the sort of thing LW is intentionally skeptical of.
This is not a separate magisterium, and so I decided not to treat it as such. In theory, everything should be discussible on LW if viewed through rationalist lenses; some things (e.g. hot-button politics) are not in practice because they are (e.g.) ultimately too distracting, or they reliably spawn demon threads, or whatever.
But as the commentary thus far shows, this seems to be not-a-problem here.
LATE EDIT: Also, this is not front-page-able; like, it’s specifically in my personal blog section and won’t ever show up in the “randomly displayed to users” or “recent top posts” feeds. It does show up in “recently commented on,” but that’s all.
I found this compelling and switched my upvote to a strong upvote. Previously I was like “neat project, good post, not clear I want LW to be more like this”. But now it’s clear to me that I do want LW to be more like this.
Users can basically write whatever they want on their personal blog, and it just won’t be frontpaged by moderators. (There are some exceptions to this, but not covering this type of post)
Note you can filter NSFW posts out of Latest Posts using the tag filters.
The policy we have, and that I like, is that users can bring their whole selves to LessWrong. In case, Duncan doesn’t have to go hunt for another place to post his content (even supposing it doesn’t have Rationality content, which I think it does, as he says elsethread).
I’ve got a comment on the personal blog / frontpage distinction I’d like to make at some point, but I’d like to do it in a meta thread instead of Duncan’s essay. Does the mod team have one of those handy?
Edit: Also a note about NSFW tags and opt-in vs opt-out, if that’s a separate meta.
I think doing it in the Open Thread probably makes most sense. (Or a top-level post if you feel like there’s more meat to the ideas that needs more space)
What’s wrong with it? I understand that not everyone wants to read it, but the content is very clearly indicated in the title and intro, so anyone who doesn’t can easily choose not to read it.
Sorry, but how on Earth is this appropriate for this forum?
It’s certainly borderline, in that it is not typical of posts on LessWrong. Absence of similar posts is at least moderate evidence that such posts genuinely do not belong, which is why I proceeded carefully (title, content warning, checking in with LW leadership rather than just assuming it was fine).
But assuming that you are actually asking, and that the question above is not rhetorical:
It is peering into a realm of human interaction and human psychology which is known to contain a lot of craziness; LW is about looking into such corners and trying to understand them and (ambitiously) trying to improve them.
It is a subject taken in rational fashion, i.e. I had a confusion and rather than simply making up my own answer, I went and checked. It models a particular (small instance of) virtue that is in line with LW’s ideals.
It is (as noted in the third bullet of “Why this post?”) a deliberate move in the “raising the sanity waterline” space. People can’t talk reasonably about this subject + here I and my former partners are talking reasonably about this subject = epsilon shift in the Overton window in the right direction.
Strong claims that it is not appropriate (which you did not make; I’m just mentioning them here because it seems relevant) would have to ground out somewhere, and since this is neither explicit nor vulgar, I suspect that most such claims ground out in “sex is just bad, just because” à la religion, which is also the sort of thing LW is intentionally skeptical of.
This is not a separate magisterium, and so I decided not to treat it as such. In theory, everything should be discussible on LW if viewed through rationalist lenses; some things (e.g. hot-button politics) are not in practice because they are (e.g.) ultimately too distracting, or they reliably spawn demon threads, or whatever.
But as the commentary thus far shows, this seems to be not-a-problem here.
LATE EDIT: Also, this is not front-page-able; like, it’s specifically in my personal blog section and won’t ever show up in the “randomly displayed to users” or “recent top posts” feeds. It does show up in “recently commented on,” but that’s all.
I found this compelling and switched my upvote to a strong upvote. Previously I was like “neat project, good post, not clear I want LW to be more like this”. But now it’s clear to me that I do want LW to be more like this.
Users can basically write whatever they want on their personal blog, and it just won’t be frontpaged by moderators. (There are some exceptions to this, but not covering this type of post)
Note you can filter NSFW posts out of Latest Posts using the tag filters.
The policy we have, and that I like, is that users can bring their whole selves to LessWrong. In case, Duncan doesn’t have to go hunt for another place to post his content (even supposing it doesn’t have Rationality content, which I think it does, as he says elsethread).
I’ve got a comment on the personal blog / frontpage distinction I’d like to make at some point, but I’d like to do it in a meta thread instead of Duncan’s essay. Does the mod team have one of those handy?
Edit: Also a note about NSFW tags and opt-in vs opt-out, if that’s a separate meta.
I think doing it in the Open Thread probably makes most sense. (Or a top-level post if you feel like there’s more meat to the ideas that needs more space)
Magic Portal!
What’s wrong with it? I understand that not everyone wants to read it, but the content is very clearly indicated in the title and intro, so anyone who doesn’t can easily choose not to read it.
(This was a choice I swiftly made.)