I think calling them “one of the biggest online threats to rational discourse” seems like a wild overstatement. That said, I was surprised to learn that RatWiki had a much higher reach compared to LW until very recently (when going by google trends).
I believe he means rationality-associsted discourse and it’s not like there are so many contenders.
There’s indeed been no one with that level of reach that has spread this much misinformation and started this many negative rumors in the space as David Gerard and RW. Whoever the second closest contender is, is likely not even close.
You can trace back to him A LOT of the negative press online that LW, EY and a ton of other places and people have got. If it wasn’t for RW LW would be much, much more respected.
There’s indeed been no one with that level of reach that has spread this much misinformation and started this many negative rumors in the space as David Gerard and RW. Whoever the second closest contender is, is likely not even close.
First place goes to David Gerard / RationalWiki—not exactly the same thing, but a huge overlap. There are also other editors on RationalWiki, but most of them are much less active and not as hostile towards the rationalist community as David. David is also the driving force behind the SneerClub, plus he edits Wikipedia, which vastly expands his possibilities (he can write a “snarky” comment on RW, have a journalist quote it, then he can quote the journalist in Wikipedia, protect the article against changes, and remove all quotes that oppose his narrative).
The distant second place goes to Alexander Kruel, mostly for his historical achievements, because he is not active recently. (But a decade ago, about 2⁄3 of negative statements about the rationalist community could be traced back to David/RW and about 1⁄3 to Alexander’s blog.)
There is no third place, IMHO. Everything else is just a blip on the radar, including the negative press recently sparked by the Zizians.
I think there is a vast difference between Gerard and Kruel, not just in the damage each has caused but also in their intellectual honesty and responsiveness to argument (null in the case of Gerard, decent in the case of Kruel, at least from my recollection).
But a decade ago, about 2⁄3 of negative statements about the rationalist community could be traced back to David/RW and about 1⁄3 to Alexander’s blog.)
Does it matter if they are are true negative statements, or false ones?
Note that Alexander Kruel still blogs regularly on axisofordinary.blogspot.com, and from his Facebook account; he just doesn’t say anything directly about rationalists. He mostly lists recent developments in AI, science, tech, and the Ukraine war.
Nice link, the rationalist community should consider moving to Kazakhstan! ;)
I don’t think this kind of comparison is important, because RW and LW are different types of websites. RationalWiki advertises itself as a resource for debunking pseudoscience, but I think that the numbers on that graph are mostly driven by their active involvement in hot topics of various culture wars: they have lots of articles on Trump, GamerGate, feminism, et cetera. On the other hand, Less Wrong actively tries to avoid all this, and tries to keep focus on mostly nerdy topics. (Also, the most popular LW writers have started their own blogs.)
So we basically have political clickbait competing for popularity with a nerdy walled garden, and if at the end of the day their numbers are similar… I think this is a pretty damning result for RationalWiki.
I think calling them “one of the biggest online threats to rational discourse” seems like a wild overstatement. That said, I was surprised to learn that RatWiki had a much higher reach compared to LW until very recently (when going by google trends).
I believe he means rationality-associsted discourse and it’s not like there are so many contenders.
There’s indeed been no one with that level of reach that has spread this much misinformation and started this many negative rumors in the space as David Gerard and RW. Whoever the second closest contender is, is likely not even close.
You can trace back to him A LOT of the negative press online that LW, EY and a ton of other places and people have got. If it wasn’t for RW LW would be much, much more respected.
First place goes to David Gerard / RationalWiki—not exactly the same thing, but a huge overlap. There are also other editors on RationalWiki, but most of them are much less active and not as hostile towards the rationalist community as David. David is also the driving force behind the SneerClub, plus he edits Wikipedia, which vastly expands his possibilities (he can write a “snarky” comment on RW, have a journalist quote it, then he can quote the journalist in Wikipedia, protect the article against changes, and remove all quotes that oppose his narrative).
The distant second place goes to Alexander Kruel, mostly for his historical achievements, because he is not active recently. (But a decade ago, about 2⁄3 of negative statements about the rationalist community could be traced back to David/RW and about 1⁄3 to Alexander’s blog.)
There is no third place, IMHO. Everything else is just a blip on the radar, including the negative press recently sparked by the Zizians.
I think there is a vast difference between Gerard and Kruel, not just in the damage each has caused but also in their intellectual honesty and responsiveness to argument (null in the case of Gerard, decent in the case of Kruel, at least from my recollection).
Does it matter if they are are true negative statements, or false ones?
Note that Alexander Kruel still blogs regularly on axisofordinary.blogspot.com, and from his Facebook account; he just doesn’t say anything directly about rationalists. He mostly lists recent developments in AI, science, tech, and the Ukraine war.
substack, not blogspot
Well, that was an interesting top-down processing error.
That would make more sense. Am curious if that was OP’s intended meaning.
Nice link, the rationalist community should consider moving to Kazakhstan! ;)
I don’t think this kind of comparison is important, because RW and LW are different types of websites. RationalWiki advertises itself as a resource for debunking pseudoscience, but I think that the numbers on that graph are mostly driven by their active involvement in hot topics of various culture wars: they have lots of articles on Trump, GamerGate, feminism, et cetera. On the other hand, Less Wrong actively tries to avoid all this, and tries to keep focus on mostly nerdy topics. (Also, the most popular LW writers have started their own blogs.)
So we basically have political clickbait competing for popularity with a nerdy walled garden, and if at the end of the day their numbers are similar… I think this is a pretty damning result for RationalWiki.