To the extent that we didn’t notice anything strange about LW’s figurehead having this OKCupid profile
Who’s this we? You’re imbuing the community with a hivemind it doesn’t possess.
I’m sure that many LW readers, if they saw the profile, would have thought it weird, inept or off-putting. Others would see it neutrally as direct, to the point, and possibly effective. Others yet might find it awesome and intriguing. But nearly everyone, I’d wager, would see it as EY’s private matter.
Look, RMS had a weird little personal ad on his website for a long time (might still be there as far as I know). I don’t think it ever hurt the credibility of the organization he’s figureheaded, the FSF. Some other things he’s said and done probably did, by the way, but not the way he chose to seek romantic companionship.
I’m hoping the whole thing is tongue-in-cheek...? (If so, it’s merely the product of poor judgment, rather than terrifying.)
(+10)
It’s not so much the content as the presentation. The tone is incredibly self-absorbed and condescending. I thought the whole thing was a joke until I encountered the above quoted paragraph with its apparent sincerity. Presumably some of the content is intended to be tongue-in-check and some of it posturing, but it’s difficult to separate. There’s a compounding weirdness to the whole thing. Fetishes or open relationships or whatever aren’t in themselves causes for concern but when somebody is trying to advocate for rationalism and a particular approach to ethics, the sense that you’re following them somewhere very strange isn’t good to have.
(+13)
Less Wrong is already weird enough without the blatant weirdness in EY’s OKCupid profile. I’m seriously disappointed and worried by the fact that it’s still public, to be honest...
(+8)
Of course, there’s also supportive comments similarly upvoted, but those comments prove that at least a few LWers agreed ‘yeah, that’s pretty blatantly weird’.
I kinda-agree with the following from that thread:
a: >99% of the time that you see that sort of profile, you really should keep the hell away from that person unless you are masochistic enough or other special conditions apply.
and b: you should sincerely thank Eliezer for writing the profile in such honest manner!
Both appear to be likely, but not in the sense that private_messaging/Dmitry seems to imply (“Eliezer really is messed up”). As social pressure against men openly stating that they’re sexually sadistic is horrifying, worse than for masochistic men (and all kinds of BDSM for women) - I should know, I’m in the same boat here! (to clarify: yes, I’m sexually sadistic and dominance is hot to me, in a “consensual” framing) -
′ - so every man who’d put this kind of thing on his profile must either 1) be socially tone-deaf, 2) have dangerously sociopathic tendencies, or 3) be uncommonly open, brave and honest.
I’d also say that upon studying the rest of the profile—which is hard not to if one reads from the beginning—it’s clear to a (minimally unprejudiced) reader that Eliezer must be the latter of those 3. Or one of the “1%” cases in which you needn’t run away, as per the quoted comment.
Who’s this we? You’re imbuing the community with a hivemind it doesn’t possess.
I’m sure that many LW readers, if they saw the profile, would have thought it weird, inept or off-putting. Others would see it neutrally as direct, to the point, and possibly effective. Others yet might find it awesome and intriguing. But nearly everyone, I’d wager, would see it as EY’s private matter.
Look, RMS had a weird little personal ad on his website for a long time (might still be there as far as I know). I don’t think it ever hurt the credibility of the organization he’s figureheaded, the FSF. Some other things he’s said and done probably did, by the way, but not the way he chose to seek romantic companionship.
It’s also wrong; look, for example, at when Eliezer’s OKCupid profile came up in a newspaper http://lesswrong.com/lw/ds4/article_about_lw_faith_hope_and_singularity/73gd
(+10)
(+13)
(+8)
Of course, there’s also supportive comments similarly upvoted, but those comments prove that at least a few LWers agreed ‘yeah, that’s pretty blatantly weird’.
I kinda-agree with the following from that thread:
Both appear to be likely, but not in the sense that private_messaging/Dmitry seems to imply (“Eliezer really is messed up”). As social pressure against men openly stating that they’re sexually sadistic is horrifying, worse than for masochistic men (and all kinds of BDSM for women) - I should know, I’m in the same boat here! (to clarify: yes, I’m sexually sadistic and dominance is hot to me, in a “consensual” framing) -
′ - so every man who’d put this kind of thing on his profile must either 1) be socially tone-deaf, 2) have dangerously sociopathic tendencies, or 3) be uncommonly open, brave and honest.
I’d also say that upon studying the rest of the profile—which is hard not to if one reads from the beginning—it’s clear to a (minimally unprejudiced) reader that Eliezer must be the latter of those 3. Or one of the “1%” cases in which you needn’t run away, as per the quoted comment.
My own reaction was “Wow, that’s definitely going to turn off most people… but not the people he would want to date, anyway.”