You could have completely ignored Alicorn and just responded to the idea behind the post. If your criticism was sufficiently good, the Less Wrong voters would have brought the karma of this post back towards normality.
Instead, you triggered a lengthy meta-discussion. Next time, please take it to the meta-thread.
I did post a criticism of the idea behind the post, long before I made this one, which got to 6. So did several others, all of whom got to 10+. Significantly fewer comments are being voted up for defending the broad attack on the heuristic. This is inconsistent with the post’s rating, and a problem with this post only.
I see no reason to justify having done anything different. Maybe if I didn’t mention the name “Alicorn”, perhaps, but I strongly suspect someone else would have done it for me if I didn’t.
Any other suggestions? That I haven’t already taken?
As I understand it, the meta-thread is for meta-level discussion of the site in general: new feature ideas, what norms to encourage, how we can be more welcoming etc. I think you’re the first person to suggest moving all meta-level excursions to the meta-thread. This is an interesting proposal (you can discuss it on the meta-thread!) but it isn’t yet what users are expected to do. We have meta-level discussions all the time in the comments to top-level posts when the meta discussion deals in particular with our discussion of that top-level post. Sometimes those discussions involve principles than could apply to a broader range of discussions but that doesn’t mean we need to move the conversation.
You could have completely ignored Alicorn and just responded to the idea behind the post. If your criticism was sufficiently good, the Less Wrong voters would have brought the karma of this post back towards normality.
Instead, you triggered a lengthy meta-discussion. Next time, please take it to the meta-thread.
I did post a criticism of the idea behind the post, long before I made this one, which got to 6. So did several others, all of whom got to 10+. Significantly fewer comments are being voted up for defending the broad attack on the heuristic. This is inconsistent with the post’s rating, and a problem with this post only.
I see no reason to justify having done anything different. Maybe if I didn’t mention the name “Alicorn”, perhaps, but I strongly suspect someone else would have done it for me if I didn’t.
Any other suggestions? That I haven’t already taken?
More frustrating than the high karma, to me, is that neither the author nor anyone else has attempt to rebut these criticisms.
True. I’ve just posted a more detailed criticism as a how-to.
As I understand it, the meta-thread is for meta-level discussion of the site in general: new feature ideas, what norms to encourage, how we can be more welcoming etc. I think you’re the first person to suggest moving all meta-level excursions to the meta-thread. This is an interesting proposal (you can discuss it on the meta-thread!) but it isn’t yet what users are expected to do. We have meta-level discussions all the time in the comments to top-level posts when the meta discussion deals in particular with our discussion of that top-level post. Sometimes those discussions involve principles than could apply to a broader range of discussions but that doesn’t mean we need to move the conversation.