Your own engagement in these three comments has been (I think naturally/non-artificially/not because you’re trying to comply) pretty well-described by those guidelines!
I hear you re: not a fan of this method, and again, I want to validate that. I did consider people with your reaction before posting, and I do consider it a cost. But I think that the most likely alternatives (nothing, attempt to crowdsource, make the claim seem more personal) were all substantially worse.
As a new user, and a novice in rational discourse, I absolutely agree with you here (though I’m not sure how much validation you might get from this comment, if any).
As is the case with any source of information (outside or inside LW), it is extremely important to doubt and question its validity, and I think that this is not intuitive, and rather hard for most people. Your guidelines helped solidify some thoughts that I previously had about better communication (truth seeking), while giving me insights on things I was probably doing wrong.
As far as an introductory course goes, this post is excellent. I do think that it could be made simpler, in the sense that newcomers might not be familiar with a majority of the terms presented (I myself had to stop several times to research on them), but that, is in a way, an appropriate introduction to the hardships of rationality (I learned a lot).
Newcomers should all strive to make individual modifications, but only after they grasp what the intentions behind the guideline.
Well, not to be annoying, but:
Your own engagement in these three comments has been (I think naturally/non-artificially/not because you’re trying to comply) pretty well-described by those guidelines!
I hear you re: not a fan of this method, and again, I want to validate that. I did consider people with your reaction before posting, and I do consider it a cost. But I think that the most likely alternatives (nothing, attempt to crowdsource, make the claim seem more personal) were all substantially worse.
As a new user, and a novice in rational discourse, I absolutely agree with you here (though I’m not sure how much validation you might get from this comment, if any).
As is the case with any source of information (outside or inside LW), it is extremely important to doubt and question its validity, and I think that this is not intuitive, and rather hard for most people. Your guidelines helped solidify some thoughts that I previously had about better communication (truth seeking), while giving me insights on things I was probably doing wrong.
As far as an introductory course goes, this post is excellent. I do think that it could be made simpler, in the sense that newcomers might not be familiar with a majority of the terms presented (I myself had to stop several times to research on them), but that, is in a way, an appropriate introduction to the hardships of rationality (I learned a lot).
Newcomers should all strive to make individual modifications, but only after they grasp what the intentions behind the guideline.