The shocker was when I realized that the emotional tone is almost certainly the result of what a few high-status members of a group prefer or preferred
Yes, if you have gained temporary influence over others one of the ways you can put that to further use is by trading that influence into an environment that accords with your preferences.
but the emotional tone is generally defended as though it’s morally superior
Regardless of how it comes to be established as a social norm, it could be that a particular tone is more suited to a particular purpose, for instance truth-seeking or community-building or fund-raising.
(For instance, academics have a strong norm of writing in an impersonal tone, usually relying on the passive voice to achieve that. This could either be the result of contingent pressure exerted by the people who founded the field, or it could be an antidote to inflamed rhetoric which would detract from the arguments of fact and inference.)
Yes, if you have gained temporary influence over others one of the ways you can put that to further use is by trading that influence into an environment that accords with your preferences.
What exactly is spent here? It looks like this is someone with enough status in the group can do “for free”.
I don’t think it’s ever free to use your influence over a group. Do it too often, and you come across as a despot.
As a local example, Eliezer’s insistence on the use of ROT13 for spoilerish comments carried through at some status “cost” when a few dissenters objected.
Yes, if you have gained temporary influence over others one of the ways you can put that to further use is by trading that influence into an environment that accords with your preferences.
Regardless of how it comes to be established as a social norm, it could be that a particular tone is more suited to a particular purpose, for instance truth-seeking or community-building or fund-raising.
(For instance, academics have a strong norm of writing in an impersonal tone, usually relying on the passive voice to achieve that. This could either be the result of contingent pressure exerted by the people who founded the field, or it could be an antidote to inflamed rhetoric which would detract from the arguments of fact and inference.)
What exactly is spent here? It looks like this is someone with enough status in the group can do “for free”.
I don’t think it’s ever free to use your influence over a group. Do it too often, and you come across as a despot.
As a local example, Eliezer’s insistence on the use of ROT13 for spoilerish comments carried through at some status “cost” when a few dissenters objected.