To be clear, I think it was obviously correct for “Truth or Dare” to be Frontpaged (it was definitely relevant and timeless, even if I disagree with it); I’m saying I don’t think it’s consistent for a direct response to a Frontpage (Curated!) post to somehow not qualify for Frontpage.
(It wasn’t obvious the post you are responding to was made on LW, since the text of your post only links to Duncan’s blog, not to the post on LW. I think the distinction between that post being from just Duncan’s blog vs. also LW specifically is a crux for flagging this on LW being reasonable. Though it’s still a delicate balance to avoid encouraging infinite feuds, inciting events unavoidably have externalities in making responses to them possible or necessary. A little bit of anything like that is never a problem directly, but it gets to feed relevant norms a little bit, making it less convenient to course correct later.)
Thanks; I edited the link (on this Less Wrong mirrorpost).
encouraging infinite feuds
“Feuds”, is that really what people think? (I think it’s fine for people to criticize me, and that it’s fine for me to reply.) I’m really surprised at the contrast between the karma and the comment section on this one—currently 10 karma in 26 votes (0.38 karma/vote). Usually when I score that poorly, it’s because I really messed up on substance, and there’s a high-karma showstopper comment explaining what I got so wrong, but none of the comments here seem like showstoppers.
As an edge-case, I can imagine a frontpage post making a cutting remark about a person while still overall meeting the frontpage criteria, and then a person writing a response post just addressing the personal aspects of the cutting remark, and that not meeting the frontpage criteria.
I don’t think that’s what’s happening here though, this reads to me as substantively engaging (critically) with the core / thrust of the frontpage post it’s responding to.
Do you have the same objection to the post I’m responding to getting Frontpaged (and in fact, Curated)?
To be clear, I think it was obviously correct for “Truth or Dare” to be Frontpaged (it was definitely relevant and timeless, even if I disagree with it); I’m saying I don’t think it’s consistent for a direct response to a Frontpage (Curated!) post to somehow not qualify for Frontpage.
(It wasn’t obvious the post you are responding to was made on LW, since the text of your post only links to Duncan’s blog, not to the post on LW. I think the distinction between that post being from just Duncan’s blog vs. also LW specifically is a crux for flagging this on LW being reasonable. Though it’s still a delicate balance to avoid encouraging infinite feuds, inciting events unavoidably have externalities in making responses to them possible or necessary. A little bit of anything like that is never a problem directly, but it gets to feed relevant norms a little bit, making it less convenient to course correct later.)
Thanks; I edited the link (on this Less Wrong mirrorpost).
“Feuds”, is that really what people think? (I think it’s fine for people to criticize me, and that it’s fine for me to reply.) I’m really surprised at the contrast between the karma and the comment section on this one—currently 10 karma in 26 votes (0.38 karma/vote). Usually when I score that poorly, it’s because I really messed up on substance, and there’s a high-karma showstopper comment explaining what I got so wrong, but none of the comments here seem like showstoppers.
As an edge-case, I can imagine a frontpage post making a cutting remark about a person while still overall meeting the frontpage criteria, and then a person writing a response post just addressing the personal aspects of the cutting remark, and that not meeting the frontpage criteria.
I don’t think that’s what’s happening here though, this reads to me as substantively engaging (critically) with the core / thrust of the frontpage post it’s responding to.
I was unaware it was on the frontpage (I thought Duncan didn’t post on LW anymore).