This may well be true (though I think not), but what is your argument about not even linking to your original posts?
I don’t know of anyone who seems to have understood the original posts, so I kinda doubt people can understand the point of them. Plus often what I’m writing about is a couple of steps removed from the original posts.
Or how often you don’t explain yourself even in completely unrelated subjects?
Part of the probing is to see which of the claims I make will seem obviously true and which of them will just seem senseless.
Ok, I will first note that this is different from what you said previously. Previously, you said “probing for whether rationalists will get the problem if framed in different ways than the original longform” but now you say “I’m trying to probe the obviousness of the claims.”. It’s good to note when such switches occur.
Second, you should stop making lazy posts with no arguments regardless of the reasons. You can get just as much, and probably much more information through making good posts, there is not a tradeoff here. In fact, if you try to explain why you think something, you will find that others will try to explain why they don’t much more often than if you don’t, and they will be pretty specific (compared to an aggregated up/down vote) about what they disagree with.
But my true objection is I just don’t like bad posts.
I don’t know of anyone who seems to have understood the original posts, so I kinda doubt people can understand the point of them. Plus often what I’m writing about is a couple of steps removed from the original posts.
Part of the probing is to see which of the claims I make will seem obviously true and which of them will just seem senseless.
Then everything you say will seem either trivial or absurd because you don’t give arguments! Please post arguments for your claims!
But that would probe the power of the arguments whereas really I’m trying to probe the obviousness of the claims.
Ok, I will first note that this is different from what you said previously. Previously, you said “probing for whether rationalists will get the problem if framed in different ways than the original longform” but now you say “I’m trying to probe the obviousness of the claims.”. It’s good to note when such switches occur.
Second, you should stop making lazy posts with no arguments regardless of the reasons. You can get just as much, and probably much more information through making good posts, there is not a tradeoff here. In fact, if you try to explain why you think something, you will find that others will try to explain why they don’t much more often than if you don’t, and they will be pretty specific (compared to an aggregated up/down vote) about what they disagree with.
But my true objection is I just don’t like bad posts.