This is really good advice for the workplace and how I would write criticisms for people who I didn’t know but wanted the help of. But it is a really terrible suggestion as a norm for Less Wrong.
Here, we’ve all more or less agreed to not take arguments personally and reward people for admitting they are wrong. Part of what is special about this place is that while it is good to be nice I can focus on whether comments are right instead of whether or not I am threatening a poster’s status. As much as possible we try to avoid status maneuvers here—so following your suggestion that we undermine the community’s signal to noise ratio in order to make allies (in a way other than being right) is a rather straightforward defection.
This doesn’t make being mean is acceptable. I agree with Alicorn’s classic post. But you seem to be advocating not just taking steps to avoid being mean but to expend extra efforts and page space on meaningless niceties instead of making forthright and respectful comments. While perhaps too confrontational in most workplaces nearly all of the examples are just fine here. If you’re going to bother correcting spelling at all (and only in certain cases is it worth it) be brief for goodness sake!
I hereby pre-commit to downvoting anyone who corrects one of my many spelling errors by writing a paragraph like
Hey Jack, I wanted to give you a heads up. I saw your recent post, but you spelled “wisen” as “wizen”—easy spelling error to make, since they’re uncommonly used words, but I thought you should know. “Wizen” means for things to dry up and lose water. Cheers and best wishes.”
...
Wisen, not wizen.
will suffice. If you can’t leave it like that “Wisen, not wizen, you idiot.” does less psychic damage than making me read that paragraph. The funny joke that was made in the original example would be the best, though.
I have also found that being able to speak bluntly and off the top of my head about what I believe to be true is enormously valuable for me in truth-seeking. Having friends and forums where that is the culture is immensely valuable. Yet learning how to not do that—how to use my “polite pen”—has also been immensely valuable to me in getting my ideas across to a broader audience.
Each has it’s place, and I think what most LWers need to hear is the point in this post, but I think it would have been clearer if all the examples were from the workplace / regular life. Then it wouldn’t have had this challenge to LW culture you perceived.
I hereby pre-commit to downvoting anyone who corrects one of my many spelling errors by writing a paragraph like
I do not make a precommitment. I don’t need to. I do make the observation that any such comment would provoke a downvote from me based on merit.
(Note that the very fact that you declared a precommitment essentially as a threat very nearly prompted me to declare that I would downvote you every time you made a spelling mistake and upvote the corrector. I stifled that impulse because the promised action was so obviously reasonable.)
I don’t see how it was a threat anymore than all precommitments to do negative things are ‘threats’. I don’t really understand why you would take issue with me here.
The OP is promoted with 34 upvotes, apparently we do have to clarify our commenting standards. I don’t see any difference between a precommitment and your ‘observation’ regarding future downvotes.
I don’t see how it was a threat anymore than all precommitments to do negative things are ‘threats’.
It isn’t.
I don’t really understand why you would take issue with me here.
I’m not. I’m agreeing with you. Just noting that if I didn’t strongly agree with you I would counter the use of force with my own. Expressing what my initial reaction was until I read as far as the actual quote.
This is really good advice for the workplace and how I would write criticisms for people who I didn’t know but wanted the help of. But it is a really terrible suggestion as a norm for Less Wrong.
Here, we’ve all more or less agreed to not take arguments personally and reward people for admitting they are wrong. Part of what is special about this place is that while it is good to be nice I can focus on whether comments are right instead of whether or not I am threatening a poster’s status. As much as possible we try to avoid status maneuvers here—so following your suggestion that we undermine the community’s signal to noise ratio in order to make allies (in a way other than being right) is a rather straightforward defection.
This doesn’t make being mean is acceptable. I agree with Alicorn’s classic post. But you seem to be advocating not just taking steps to avoid being mean but to expend extra efforts and page space on meaningless niceties instead of making forthright and respectful comments. While perhaps too confrontational in most workplaces nearly all of the examples are just fine here. If you’re going to bother correcting spelling at all (and only in certain cases is it worth it) be brief for goodness sake!
I hereby pre-commit to downvoting anyone who corrects one of my many spelling errors by writing a paragraph like
...
will suffice. If you can’t leave it like that “Wisen, not wizen, you idiot.” does less psychic damage than making me read that paragraph. The funny joke that was made in the original example would be the best, though.
I have also found that being able to speak bluntly and off the top of my head about what I believe to be true is enormously valuable for me in truth-seeking. Having friends and forums where that is the culture is immensely valuable. Yet learning how to not do that—how to use my “polite pen”—has also been immensely valuable to me in getting my ideas across to a broader audience.
Each has it’s place, and I think what most LWers need to hear is the point in this post, but I think it would have been clearer if all the examples were from the workplace / regular life. Then it wouldn’t have had this challenge to LW culture you perceived.
I do not make a precommitment. I don’t need to. I do make the observation that any such comment would provoke a downvote from me based on merit.
(Note that the very fact that you declared a precommitment essentially as a threat very nearly prompted me to declare that I would downvote you every time you made a spelling mistake and upvote the corrector. I stifled that impulse because the promised action was so obviously reasonable.)
I don’t see how it was a threat anymore than all precommitments to do negative things are ‘threats’. I don’t really understand why you would take issue with me here.
The OP is promoted with 34 upvotes, apparently we do have to clarify our commenting standards. I don’t see any difference between a precommitment and your ‘observation’ regarding future downvotes.
One reasonable definition of a threat would be: “A precommitment to harm someone else if they perform, or fail to perform, certain actions.”
So, it’s not more of a threat than any other precommitment to do negative things in response to others actions.
It isn’t.
I’m not. I’m agreeing with you. Just noting that if I didn’t strongly agree with you I would counter the use of force with my own. Expressing what my initial reaction was until I read as far as the actual quote.