Consider this easy-to-predict eventuality as an indictment of how incredibly ineffective and mindkilled LessWrong is about sex, for obviously ideological reasons (though we may disagree about which side it is that is mindkilled).
In addition to the problems already pointed out with this comment, another thing I’d like to address is:
(though we may disagree about which side it is that is mindkilled)
If one suspects that mindkilling is happening, the most likely result isn’t that it is happening on one “side” but rather with pretty much both “sides”- thinking in terms of sides is already to some extent a sign of mindkilling. But large scale discussion is not, and better not be, in any reasonable setting a sign by itself of mindkilling but just evidence of levels of interest.
Probably: controversy → lots of comments. If you think that, for example, feminism should be trivial or trivially dismissed, then controversy indicates a problem.
“Feminism” in its colloquial understanding covers so much beliefs and memes at this point that it’s possible to consider some of them trivial (e.g. “the traditional gender structure is unjust, immoral and insidious”) while trivially dismissing others (e.g. “most men are currently privileged over most women”, “male sexuality is inherently aggressive/antisocial”).
Okay, fair enough. Personally, I would say that, yeah, men do have gender-related “privilege”, that this is trivial once it’s pointed out, and that it’s basically part of why “the traditional gender structure is unjust, immoral and insidious”. So there you go.
No need to snark! That’s probably true, but also it’s mitigated by the fact that the great-grandfather is a prediction rather than an after-the-fact interpretation. In any case, I’m just translating, not making my own assertion.
Consider this easy-to-predict eventuality as an indictment of how incredibly ineffective and mindkilled LessWrong is about sex, for obviously ideological reasons (though we may disagree about which side it is that is mindkilled).
Doesn’t follow. The base rate for getting more than 100 comments on a main, non-announcement article is already something like 70%.
Ah, but this was less the case at the time the poll was made (the community has been growing in the meantime) and it was also not clear that this would be a Main as opposed to Discussion post. So that has to be factored into the probabilities.
In order to estimate the base rate, I looked at the first page of recent posts, which goes back to October 2011.
I suspect a similar thing is true of Discussion, but the reference class would need to be more precise. (i.e., non-link, established user author, longer than X words).
I predicted with 90% certainty that there would be over 500 comments. On the other hand, quite a few of the comments are mine. On the remaining hand, I’m also 90% certain that the comments will go over 500 even not including mine.
though we may disagree about which side it is that is mindkilled
“Just because the two of you disagree doesn’t mean one of you is right”¹; IOW, I think both sides are mindkilled to some extent—though surprisingly much less than usual.
I’m having a hard time finding the original wording and attribution of this on Google; can anybody help?
Presumably you consider every more-or-less-polite forum on sex/gender issues to be mind-killed too, then? The fact that people tend to get incensed about, strongly condemn and downvote things that they deem to be politically extremist/misanthropic/misogynistic… is it really the standard by which to judge mind-killedness? Or should we rather look at the quality of empirical and moral arguments used in the discussion, without showing undue tolerance to attacks on the Enlightenment values that LW’s mission implicitly includes?
Would you show the same tolerance to overt racism and political extremism in a thread on group differences in intelligence? In my opinion, LW handles that controversy admirably, and has never let the moral issues inherent in it out of the discussion.
Relevant:
The “Anonymous Narratives by LW Women” thread will receive >100 comments,
The “Anonymous Narratives by LW Women” thread will receive >500 comments
Consider this easy-to-predict eventuality as an indictment of how incredibly ineffective and mindkilled LessWrong is about sex, for obviously ideological reasons (though we may disagree about which side it is that is mindkilled).
In addition to the problems already pointed out with this comment, another thing I’d like to address is:
If one suspects that mindkilling is happening, the most likely result isn’t that it is happening on one “side” but rather with pretty much both “sides”- thinking in terms of sides is already to some extent a sign of mindkilling. But large scale discussion is not, and better not be, in any reasonable setting a sign by itself of mindkilling but just evidence of levels of interest.
What’s your line of thought that large numbers of comments are a clear indication of a mind-killed community?
Probably: controversy → lots of comments. If you think that, for example, feminism should be trivial or trivially dismissed, then controversy indicates a problem.
“Feminism” in its colloquial understanding covers so much beliefs and memes at this point that it’s possible to consider some of them trivial (e.g. “the traditional gender structure is unjust, immoral and insidious”) while trivially dismissing others (e.g. “most men are currently privileged over most women”, “male sexuality is inherently aggressive/antisocial”).
Relevant
(I’m getting addicted to linking to posts by Yvain. Maybe I should beemind to not doing that more than twice per day or something.)
I think its fine. More people should read posts by Yvain, and your links seem topical.
Okay, fair enough. Personally, I would say that, yeah, men do have gender-related “privilege”, that this is trivial once it’s pointed out, and that it’s basically part of why “the traditional gender structure is unjust, immoral and insidious”. So there you go.
Yup, but the arrow pointing the other way (the one NancyLebovitz asked about) is likely waaay thinner and noisier than that.
No need to snark! That’s probably true, but also it’s mitigated by the fact that the great-grandfather is a prediction rather than an after-the-fact interpretation. In any case, I’m just translating, not making my own assertion.
I didn’t intend any snark.
My bad! Probably just oversensitive because of what thread we’re in. Apologies!
Doesn’t follow. The base rate for getting more than 100 comments on a main, non-announcement article is already something like 70%.
Ah, but this was less the case at the time the poll was made (the community has been growing in the meantime) and it was also not clear that this would be a Main as opposed to Discussion post. So that has to be factored into the probabilities.
In order to estimate the base rate, I looked at the first page of recent posts, which goes back to October 2011.
I suspect a similar thing is true of Discussion, but the reference class would need to be more precise. (i.e., non-link, established user author, longer than X words).
I predicted with 90% certainty that there would be over 500 comments. On the other hand, quite a few of the comments are mine. On the remaining hand, I’m also 90% certain that the comments will go over 500 even not including mine.
“Just because the two of you disagree doesn’t mean one of you is right”¹; IOW, I think both sides are mindkilled to some extent—though surprisingly much less than usual.
I’m having a hard time finding the original wording and attribution of this on Google; can anybody help?
Presumably you consider every more-or-less-polite forum on sex/gender issues to be mind-killed too, then? The fact that people tend to get incensed about, strongly condemn and downvote things that they deem to be politically extremist/misanthropic/misogynistic… is it really the standard by which to judge mind-killedness? Or should we rather look at the quality of empirical and moral arguments used in the discussion, without showing undue tolerance to attacks on the Enlightenment values that LW’s mission implicitly includes?
Would you show the same tolerance to overt racism and political extremism in a thread on group differences in intelligence? In my opinion, LW handles that controversy admirably, and has never let the moral issues inherent in it out of the discussion.
But if there weren’t politically extremist / misanthropic / misogynistic (mind-killed) posts, the discussion wouldn’t be very long!
(Or at least that’s how I’m reading the grandparent.)