I think you’re more focused on Bob than I am, and have more confidence in your model of Bob’s idea generation/propagation mechanisms.
I WANT Bob to update toward more correct ideas in the future, and that includes feedback when he’s wrong. And I want to correctly adjust my prior estimate of Bob’s future correctness. Both of these involve recognizing that errors occurred, and reducing (not to zero, but not at the level of the previous always-correct Bob) the expectation of future goodness.
Currently 1, with 4 votes. My other comment on the post is at 2 with 5 votes. This is below target for me, but not enough that I’m likely to change much. Note that I don’t care much about Karma totals, more about replies and further discussion. I have in the past announced that I believe that I intend my comments to be true beliefs, but also to provoke further reaction/correction. One measure of this is to seek to comment in ways that attract some number of downvotes.
Also, there’s no irony if the downvoters do not believe I’ve earned any epistemic respect from previous comments, so they do not want to encourage my further commenting.
Also, there’s no irony if the downvoters do not believe I’ve earned any epistemic respect from previous comments, so they do not want to encourage my further commenting.
You’re right of course, I just found it amusing that someone would disagree that it’s a good idea to provide negative feedback and then provide negative feedback.
I think you’re more focused on Bob than I am, and have more confidence in your model of Bob’s idea generation/propagation mechanisms.
I WANT Bob to update toward more correct ideas in the future, and that includes feedback when he’s wrong. And I want to correctly adjust my prior estimate of Bob’s future correctness. Both of these involve recognizing that errors occurred, and reducing (not to zero, but not at the level of the previous always-correct Bob) the expectation of future goodness.
Just want to check that whoever downvoted Dagon’s comment sees the irony? :)
(Context: At time of writing the parent comment was at −1 karma)
Currently 1, with 4 votes. My other comment on the post is at 2 with 5 votes. This is below target for me, but not enough that I’m likely to change much. Note that I don’t care much about Karma totals, more about replies and further discussion. I have in the past announced that I believe that I intend my comments to be true beliefs, but also to provoke further reaction/correction. One measure of this is to seek to comment in ways that attract some number of downvotes.
Also, there’s no irony if the downvoters do not believe I’ve earned any epistemic respect from previous comments, so they do not want to encourage my further commenting.
You’re right of course, I just found it amusing that someone would disagree that it’s a good idea to provide negative feedback and then provide negative feedback.