But LW isn’t reflective of SI, most of the people that voted on this article have no affiliation with SI. So the high number of upvotes is less reflective of SI welcoming criticism than LW being dissatisfied with the organization of SI.
Furthermore, this post’s criticism of Eliezer’s research less strong than its criticism of SI’s organization . SI has always been somewhat open to criticism of its organizational structure and many of the current leadership of SI has criticized the organizational structure at some point. But who criticize Eliezer’s research do not manage to rise in SI’s research division and generally aren’t well received even on LW (Roko).
Lastly, laughing at somebody when they call your organization a cult is not a convincing argument, they’re more likely to think of your organization as a cult (at least they will think you are arrogant).
But LW isn’t reflective of SI, most of the people that voted on this article have no affiliation with SI. So the high number of upvotes is less reflective of SI welcoming criticism than LW being dissatisfied with the organization of SI.
Furthermore, this post’s criticism of Eliezer’s research less strong than its criticism of SI’s organization . SI has always been somewhat open to criticism of its organizational structure and many of the current leadership of SI has criticized the organizational structure at some point. But who criticize Eliezer’s research do not manage to rise in SI’s research division and generally aren’t well received even on LW (Roko).
Lastly, laughing at somebody when they call your organization a cult is not a convincing argument, they’re more likely to think of your organization as a cult (at least they will think you are arrogant).