This is a bad idea. Attempting to create personal relationships will just accelerate LW’s degeneration into a typical internet hugbox. People will start supporting or opposing ideas based on whether they are “e-friends”.
It is a fairly obvious problem, and what’s more it’s already been brought up, so maybe people have noticed it and just decided the game is worth the candle? For myself, I figure I’m really not capable of feeling neutral toward people for any length of time, and the almost complete lack of any positive social interaction on LW, combined with the continual arguing, had left me feeling sort of annoyed and uncomfortable toward the average LWer. I’m not looking to join any kind of e-clique, just trying to shift the balance back the other way a bit.
the almost complete lack of any positive social interaction on LW, combined with the continual arguing
Funny, I see that as the defining feature of LW, and as its principal advantage over other places. You get to see the distilled essence of concrete things that people have to say on a given topic, unobscured with distractions that would otherwise inevitably follow. (Don’t get me wrong, in real life I’m much more personable and merry than I choose to be here, but outside of strictly technical discussions, this has an inevitable large cost when it comes to the precision and rigor of discourse.)
had left me feeling sort of annoyed and uncomfortable toward the average LWer
Are you sure it wouldn’t be much worse with people trying to be “friends”? As they say, familiarity breeds contempt.
Hypothesis: People who IRL are relatively well-connected socially (but feel obliged to conceal many of their views from their meatspace associates) and people who actually feel socially isolated or alienated IRL will have divergent views about the optimal level of familiarity in this online community.
For what its worth, I think abrasiveness breeds more contempt than does familiarity.
Hypothesis: People who IRL are relatively well-connected socially (but feel obliged to conceal many of their views from their meatspace associates) and people who actually feel socially isolated or alienated IRL will have divergent views about the optimal level of familiarity in this online community.
Probably true, but if one suffers from social isolation and alienation in meatspace, trying to remedy that situation by seeking internet friends in a place like this one would likely be a highly suboptimal (to put it charitably) way of addressing that problem.
For what its worth, I think abrasiveness breeds more contempt than does familiarity.
It might conceivably breed more ill feelings in general, but not contempt in particular.
I agree that abrasiveness is better avoided too, though.
Agreed, though I also think “abrasive” and “familiar” are terms that only make sense relative to some specific notion of what the unmarked baseline is. Personally I find very most of the discussion on LW neither of these things.
Although, I have instead come to the realization that I should stop trying to change LW to suit my needs, because most the people on here like it as is. The fact that, like you, it makes me “annoyed and uncomfortable” is my own problem, and it is unfair of me to try to force my social preferences on others. It makes more sense to instead find a community that already matches those preferences.
The fact that, like you, it makes me “annoyed and uncomfortable” is my own problem, and it is unfair of me to try to force my social preferences on others. It makes more sense to instead find a community that already matches those preferences.
Honestly, I’d much rather you stay and help us fix it.
the almost complete lack of any positive social interaction on LW, combined with the continual arguing, had left me feeling sort of annoyed and uncomfortable toward the average LWer.
I note that arguing can be a positive social interaction (although it often isn’t, granted).
Of course you don’t think it’s affecting your judgments. Most people accept the religious or political tradition their parents follow, but they feel like they’re just making the objectively correct choice. It’s an obvious extension of the halo effect. Ideas that come from your e-friends will seem better than ideas that don’t.
Even if that’s true, the comparison you have to make is between the expected value of business as usual, and on the other hand the expected value of making friends.
I down-voted you, not because you don’t like my idea (that’s fine. A lot of other people don’t too, and I didn’t down-vote them), but because you didn’t follow the directions to put comments about the idea in the “Meta-comment” thread, in order to keep the discussion here nice and organized, and not all over the place.
This is a bad idea. Attempting to create personal relationships will just accelerate LW’s degeneration into a typical internet hugbox. People will start supporting or opposing ideas based on whether they are “e-friends”.
I strongly agree with this, and I am seriously disappointed that more people don’t see it as an obvious problem.
It is a fairly obvious problem, and what’s more it’s already been brought up, so maybe people have noticed it and just decided the game is worth the candle? For myself, I figure I’m really not capable of feeling neutral toward people for any length of time, and the almost complete lack of any positive social interaction on LW, combined with the continual arguing, had left me feeling sort of annoyed and uncomfortable toward the average LWer. I’m not looking to join any kind of e-clique, just trying to shift the balance back the other way a bit.
Funny, I see that as the defining feature of LW, and as its principal advantage over other places. You get to see the distilled essence of concrete things that people have to say on a given topic, unobscured with distractions that would otherwise inevitably follow. (Don’t get me wrong, in real life I’m much more personable and merry than I choose to be here, but outside of strictly technical discussions, this has an inevitable large cost when it comes to the precision and rigor of discourse.)
Are you sure it wouldn’t be much worse with people trying to be “friends”? As they say, familiarity breeds contempt.
Hypothesis: People who IRL are relatively well-connected socially (but feel obliged to conceal many of their views from their meatspace associates) and people who actually feel socially isolated or alienated IRL will have divergent views about the optimal level of familiarity in this online community.
For what its worth, I think abrasiveness breeds more contempt than does familiarity.
Probably true, but if one suffers from social isolation and alienation in meatspace, trying to remedy that situation by seeking internet friends in a place like this one would likely be a highly suboptimal (to put it charitably) way of addressing that problem.
It might conceivably breed more ill feelings in general, but not contempt in particular.
I agree that abrasiveness is better avoided too, though.
Agreed, though I also think “abrasive” and “familiar” are terms that only make sense relative to some specific notion of what the unmarked baseline is. Personally I find very most of the discussion on LW neither of these things.
Upvoted, and completely agree.
Although, I have instead come to the realization that I should stop trying to change LW to suit my needs, because most the people on here like it as is. The fact that, like you, it makes me “annoyed and uncomfortable” is my own problem, and it is unfair of me to try to force my social preferences on others. It makes more sense to instead find a community that already matches those preferences.
Honestly, I’d much rather you stay and help us fix it.
I note that arguing can be a positive social interaction (although it often isn’t, granted).
Based on my experience in the in-person community in Berkeley, this seems not like a thing to worry about.
If we really can’t have a discussion about rationality without keeping one another at arms length, I think we’re failing from the start.
Of course you don’t think it’s affecting your judgments. Most people accept the religious or political tradition their parents follow, but they feel like they’re just making the objectively correct choice. It’s an obvious extension of the halo effect. Ideas that come from your e-friends will seem better than ideas that don’t.
This could be an option.
Even if that’s true, the comparison you have to make is between the expected value of business as usual, and on the other hand the expected value of making friends.
My calculations say: Hugboxen for everyone!
Real friends are very valuable. Internet friends aren’t.
Your statement isn’t obviously enough true to be posted without support. (Or necessarily true at all, for that matter, but that’s beside the point.)
I down-voted you, not because you don’t like my idea (that’s fine. A lot of other people don’t too, and I didn’t down-vote them), but because you didn’t follow the directions to put comments about the idea in the “Meta-comment” thread, in order to keep the discussion here nice and organized, and not all over the place.
Maybe we should embrace an opportunity to put our rationality skills into practice.