Do you mean that the mechanisms and expectations will be more severe if it’s framed as value/harm rather than etiquette? If so, I wasn’t intending to reduce the potential seriousness with my phrasing.
I suspect that “severity of mechanism” will have the same range for the two framings. I think the complexity and utility of the ruleset will be different.
Trying to work from human norms and politeness/guess-culture assumptions will lead to weird exceptions and hard-to-predict behaviors. Working from a consequentialist harm/benefit framework seems likely to navigate those nuances and exceptions.
Do you mean that the mechanisms and expectations will be more severe if it’s framed as value/harm rather than etiquette? If so, I wasn’t intending to reduce the potential seriousness with my phrasing.
I suspect that “severity of mechanism” will have the same range for the two framings. I think the complexity and utility of the ruleset will be different.
Trying to work from human norms and politeness/guess-culture assumptions will lead to weird exceptions and hard-to-predict behaviors. Working from a consequentialist harm/benefit framework seems likely to navigate those nuances and exceptions.