This reads like you already had a conclusion in mind and searched for any way to support it while avoiding actually considering the counter arguments.
People sometimes hear about the risk from AI and assume violence is the answer. When they post on LessWrong about it, they get immediate and overwhelming feedback that this is not helpful at all. If calls for violence were banned, I think many of those people would assume that we all secretly support violence but don’t talk about it. The fact that discussion of violence is allowed but that LW users are overwhelmingly opposed to it is a stronger signal than ambiguous silence. You mention this but don’t take it seriously.
The biggest actual risk is that people take these comments out of context and make it sound like LessWrong users are in favor of violence. I find it hard to take the author’s concern here seriously since they started this argument by posting an out-of-context screenshot with the karma removed implying that LessWrong supports violence. [See comments]
Also I don’t really see the point of your proposed policy of allowing calls for violence as long as the users dance around the topic. You’d get exactly the same practical effect except mods have to adjudicate if the user was calling for violence or just implying a call to violence.
by posting an out-of-context screenshot with the karma removed implying that LessWrong supports violence
The tweet literally said “highly downvoted” And was not in any way “out-of-context”. It did not imply LessWrong supports violence; I’ve made many comments explaining that the opposite is the case.
This reads like you already had a conclusion in mind and searched for any way to support it while avoiding actually considering the counter arguments.
People sometimes hear about the risk from AI and assume violence is the answer. When they post on LessWrong about it, they get immediate and overwhelming feedback that this is not helpful at all. If calls for violence were banned, I think many of those people would assume that we all secretly support violence but don’t talk about it. The fact that discussion of violence is allowed but that LW users are overwhelmingly opposed to it is a stronger signal than ambiguous silence. You mention this but don’t take it seriously.
The biggest actual risk is that people take these comments out of context and make it sound like LessWrong users are in favor of violence.
I find it hard to take the author’s concern here seriously since they started this argument by posting an out-of-context screenshot with the karma removed implying that LessWrong supports violence.[See comments]Also I don’t really see the point of your proposed policy of allowing calls for violence as long as the users dance around the topic. You’d get exactly the same practical effect except mods have to adjudicate if the user was calling for violence or just implying a call to violence.
The tweet literally said “highly downvoted” And was not in any way “out-of-context”. It did not imply LessWrong supports violence; I’ve made many comments explaining that the opposite is the case.