I think caring about agreement first vs VoI first leads to different behavior. Here’s two test cases:
1) Someone strongly disagrees with you but doesn’t say anything interesting. Do you ask for their reasons (agreement first) or ignore them and talk to someone else who’s saying interesting but less disagreeable things (VoI first)?
2) You’re one of many people disagreeing with a post. Do you spell out your reasons that are similar to everyone else’s (agreement first) or try to say something new (VoI first)?
The VoI option works better for me. Given the choice whether to bring up something abstractly interesting or something I feel strongly about, I’ll choose the interesting idea every time. It’s more fun and more fruitful.
I think caring about agreement first vs VoI first leads to different behavior. Here’s two test cases:
1) Someone strongly disagrees with you but doesn’t say anything interesting. Do you ask for their reasons (agreement first) or ignore them and talk to someone else who’s saying interesting but less disagreeable things (VoI first)?
2) You’re one of many people disagreeing with a post. Do you spell out your reasons that are similar to everyone else’s (agreement first) or try to say something new (VoI first)?
The VoI option works better for me. Given the choice whether to bring up something abstractly interesting or something I feel strongly about, I’ll choose the interesting idea every time. It’s more fun and more fruitful.
Gotcha, this makes sense to me. I would want to follow the VoI strategy in each of your two test cases.