We like to say “politics is the mind killer” and I say from time to time “social politics is the mind killer”. … We are reluctant to talk about politics. We do discuss it here and there but cautiously and only around the fringes. I suggest that we already have exactly the same approach when it comes to discussing social politics and for much the same reason.
Wait, what? This is nonsense. Nonsense on stilts.
Please read the Less Wrong wiki page on Mind-killer, which summarizes the arguments for not doing politics at LessWrong better than any ‘sequence’ or blog post could. Note that there is no prohibition on discussing how politics works in the abstract! What we do discourage is engaging in political debate, because such “debates” tend to ultimately involve very concrete matters, such as power relationships, the state of one’s real-world community or ‘social ecology’, and yes, violent conflict. Such matters must be managed carefully, using complex strategies to achieve de-escalation and compromise. Discussing such strategies is not just permitted or encouraged: in the long run, it is vital to the success of the rationalist project.
The proper equivalent in the ‘social politics’ realm would be using some kind of social influence tactic here at LW to achieve a higher status in the social group of LW contributors, perhaps leveraging that to obtain some marginal benefit in the real world. Clearly, the scope for abuse is far more limited.
Please read the Less Wrong wiki page on Mind-killer
It would be more reasonable to assume that I do, in fact, know how the mind killing aspects of politics work and am directly suggesting that this topic is subject to powerful political bias. This would (hopefully) make sense of my claim:
Because what filled the gap would necessarily be either bullshit or offensive to vocal members.
Being well aware of the issues involved in discussing politics as well as how the ‘mind killing’ policy applies both in theory and practice I believe you to be mistaken.
Wait, what? This is nonsense. Nonsense on stilts.
Please read the Less Wrong wiki page on Mind-killer, which summarizes the arguments for not doing politics at LessWrong better than any ‘sequence’ or blog post could. Note that there is no prohibition on discussing how politics works in the abstract! What we do discourage is engaging in political debate, because such “debates” tend to ultimately involve very concrete matters, such as power relationships, the state of one’s real-world community or ‘social ecology’, and yes, violent conflict. Such matters must be managed carefully, using complex strategies to achieve de-escalation and compromise. Discussing such strategies is not just permitted or encouraged: in the long run, it is vital to the success of the rationalist project.
The proper equivalent in the ‘social politics’ realm would be using some kind of social influence tactic here at LW to achieve a higher status in the social group of LW contributors, perhaps leveraging that to obtain some marginal benefit in the real world. Clearly, the scope for abuse is far more limited.
It would be more reasonable to assume that I do, in fact, know how the mind killing aspects of politics work and am directly suggesting that this topic is subject to powerful political bias. This would (hopefully) make sense of my claim:
Being well aware of the issues involved in discussing politics as well as how the ‘mind killing’ policy applies both in theory and practice I believe you to be mistaken.