I wonder if anyone actually thinks this is clever or something. I mean, inventing ways to communicate that are obscure to the public is one of the signs of a cult. And acting like you have something to hide just makes people think you do. So while this might give us a smaller signature on Google’s radar, I cringe to think of actual human newcomers to the site, and their impression.
Also, a simple call to sanity: the blog owner himself has written postswithcult in the very title. I just put “cult” and “rationality” into google and I see 2 references to LW in the first 10 (unpersonalised) results. It’s kinda late to start being sneaky...
My weak prediction hasn’t been entirely on mark… The word did migrate to RationalWiki, but other than being in the “The Bad” section, I don’t see it expressly mocked. This is the one time where—LW-supporter though I most of the time am, and one who agrees with most of what Grognor said—I’m going to say “too bad”.
_
(I apologise about being kinda off topic. This was prompted by a bunch of comments on this page and elsewhere more than Grognor’s post, except the part where he makes “phyg” a tag.)
I wonder if anyone actually thinks this is clever or something. I mean, inventing ways to communicate that are obscure to the public is one of the signs of a cult. And acting like you have something to hide just makes people think you do. So while this might give us a smaller signature on Google’s radar, I cringe to think of actual human newcomers to the site, and their impression.
Disagree and strongly oppose your influence. Obfuscating an unnecessary google keyword is not the sign of a cult. That word has an actual real world meaning and it evidently isn’t the one you seem to think it is. It means this.
This is the one time where—LW-supporter though I most of the time am, and one who agrees with most of what Grognor said—I’m going to say “too bad”.
I hope your needless defection is suppressed beyond the threshold for visibility.
Mind you, I’ve never used the term “phyg” (well, except in the quote here) and don’t plan to. Putting it as an actual tag is ridiculous. If you don’t want to associate with a concept that is already irrelevant just ignore it. Ironically, this means that only part of your comment that I can agree with is initial “Uh… This ‘phyg’ thing has not died yet?” The justification of the aversion is muddled thinking.
this means that only part of your comment that I can agree with is initial “Uh… This ‘phyg’ thing has not died yet?” The justification of the aversion is muddled thinking.
What’s your unmuddled justification? (not sarcasm, interested what you think)
What’s your unmuddled justification? (not sarcasm, interested what you think)
If you’ll pardon my literal (and so crude) description of my reaction, “Ick. That word sucks dried monkey balls. You guys sound like total dorks if you say that all the time.”
ie. I probably share approximately your sentiment just sans any “that means you’re cultish” sentiment.
Sorry, I didn’t mean “that means you’re cultish”, more like “that will look cultish/fishy to some newcomers”. (And also “I find it embarassingly silly”).
Uh… This “phyg” thing has not died yet?
I wonder if anyone actually thinks this is clever or something. I mean, inventing ways to communicate that are obscure to the public is one of the signs of a cult. And acting like you have something to hide just makes people think you do. So while this might give us a smaller signature on Google’s radar, I cringe to think of actual human newcomers to the site, and their impression.
Also, a simple call to sanity: the blog owner himself has written posts with cult in the very title. I just put “cult” and “rationality” into google and I see 2 references to LW in the first 10 (unpersonalised) results. It’s kinda late to start being sneaky...
My weak prediction hasn’t been entirely on mark… The word did migrate to RationalWiki, but other than being in the “The Bad” section, I don’t see it expressly mocked. This is the one time where—LW-supporter though I most of the time am, and one who agrees with most of what Grognor said—I’m going to say “too bad”.
_
(I apologise about being kinda off topic. This was prompted by a bunch of comments on this page and elsewhere more than Grognor’s post, except the part where he makes “phyg” a tag.)
Disagree and strongly oppose your influence. Obfuscating an unnecessary google keyword is not the sign of a cult. That word has an actual real world meaning and it evidently isn’t the one you seem to think it is. It means this.
I hope your needless defection is suppressed beyond the threshold for visibility.
Mind you, I’ve never used the term “phyg” (well, except in the quote here) and don’t plan to. Putting it as an actual tag is ridiculous. If you don’t want to associate with a concept that is already irrelevant just ignore it. Ironically, this means that only part of your comment that I can agree with is initial “Uh… This ‘phyg’ thing has not died yet?” The justification of the aversion is muddled thinking.
What’s your unmuddled justification? (not sarcasm, interested what you think)
If you’ll pardon my literal (and so crude) description of my reaction, “Ick. That word sucks dried monkey balls. You guys sound like total dorks if you say that all the time.”
ie. I probably share approximately your sentiment just sans any “that means you’re cultish” sentiment.
Pardoned. ;)
Sorry, I didn’t mean “that means you’re cultish”, more like “that will look cultish/fishy to some newcomers”. (And also “I find it embarassingly silly”).