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.
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.