Don’t delete, ban or otherwise punish critics, would be my recommendation. Critics often bear unpopular messages. The only group I have ever participated in where critics were treated properly is the security/cryptographic community. There, if someone bothers to criticise something, if anything they are thanked for their input.
I don’t perceive a big difference between the crypto community and LW here. Do you have an example in mind of someone who speaks to the wider crypto community with the same tone that SamAdams speaks to us, but who is treated as a valued contributor?
Don’t delete, ban or otherwise punish critics, would be my recommendation. Critics often bear unpopular messages.
“Critic” is not a very useful category, moderation-wise. What matters is quality of argument, not implied conclusions, so an inane supporter of the group should be banned as readily as an inane defector, and there seems to be little value in keeping inane contributors around, whether “critics” or not.
Re: “Rational groupthink-alleviating measures”
Don’t delete, ban or otherwise punish critics, would be my recommendation. Critics often bear unpopular messages. The only group I have ever participated in where critics were treated properly is the security/cryptographic community. There, if someone bothers to criticise something, if anything they are thanked for their input.
I don’t perceive a big difference between the crypto community and LW here. Do you have an example in mind of someone who speaks to the wider crypto community with the same tone that SamAdams speaks to us, but who is treated as a valued contributor?
I haven’t looked closely at the case of SamAdams.
“Critic” is not a very useful category, moderation-wise. What matters is quality of argument, not implied conclusions, so an inane supporter of the group should be banned as readily as an inane defector, and there seems to be little value in keeping inane contributors around, whether “critics” or not.