I never claimed that Caleb is an LW member, Lumifer. Stating that Caleb doesn’t have enough karma to post was a shorter way of saying that “Caleb does not currently have an LW account, but he wants to discuss the post on LW. Therefore, he got a new account. A new account doesn’t have enough karma to post, so therefore I am posting it on his behalf.” Why waste people’s time with those whole three sentences when I can just have a brief clause in a sentence? The fuller explanation does not carry any more benefit than the brief one, in my perception. Besides, others posted stuff on behalf of people without enough karma plenty of times, for instance here.
So please don’t go accusing me of everything negative under the sun because you don’t like my writing. Thanks!
People normally interpret other people’s statements according to the context implied. So for example, if I said, “So how come you haven’t given yourself up for committing serial murder?”, people would assume that I think you are a serial murderer, and they might even describe this by saying that I said you were, even though I would not have said that in a technical sense.
In the same way, “Caleb doesn’t have enough karma,” implies the context that he has a Less Wrong account with insufficient karma, and it would be normal to say that you said this, as Lumifer is doing, even if you did not do so in a technical sense. It was in fact quite unnecessary to do this, nor was it necessary to use three sentences. You could have simply said, “Caleb doesn’t have a Less Wrong account yet.”
That said, since he does not appear to have shown up in the comments yet, I rather suspect that you might be the motivating force here and that really he is not all that interested in posting on Less Wrong.
In saying “doesn’t have enough karma,” I was pointing to the obstacle to him posting. It’s easy to get a LW account—takes one minute—but it’s not easy to get karma sufficient to post.
I think you might have missed his comments, his LW name is RevPitkin.
“”Caleb does not currently have an LW account, but he wants to discuss the post on LW. Therefore, he got a new account.”
LOL. You’re tripping up on tenses. If Caleb “does not currently have” (present tense), he could not have “got” (past tense). He only could “be getting” (present continuous) or “will get” (future).
others posted stuff on behalf of people
I notice that the post in the thread your link leads to says “This post was collaboratively written together with...”
Sure you don’t want to reconsider taking OrphanWilde’s advice?
In saying “doesn’t have enough karma,” I was pointing to the obstacle to him posting. It’s easy to get a LW account—takes one minute—but it’s not easy to get karma sufficient to post. Anyway, I don’t think this thread is helpful to continue anymore.
It’s easy to get a LW account—takes one minute—but it’s not easy to get karma sufficient to post.
It is trivially easy. You put up a comment saying “I wish to make a post about this-and-that, but lack karma. I would appreciate gifts of karma so that I could post” and lo and behold! in a few hours at most you have sufficient karma to post.
How much would a user have to know about LW to think to do that? Heck, even I didn’t think of suggesting to Caleb to do that, as that notion didn’t occur to me. You’re failing at other minds.
How much would a user have to know about LW to think to do that?
I’ve seen it happen, and more than once, too. I think all you have to know is that you need a particular quantity of internet points and that people can give them to you for free. You just ask.
You’re failing at other minds.
I will concede that my expectations of certain LW users might have been too high :-P
I never claimed that Caleb is an LW member, Lumifer. Stating that Caleb doesn’t have enough karma to post was a shorter way of saying that “Caleb does not currently have an LW account, but he wants to discuss the post on LW. Therefore, he got a new account. A new account doesn’t have enough karma to post, so therefore I am posting it on his behalf.” Why waste people’s time with those whole three sentences when I can just have a brief clause in a sentence? The fuller explanation does not carry any more benefit than the brief one, in my perception. Besides, others posted stuff on behalf of people without enough karma plenty of times, for instance here.
So please don’t go accusing me of everything negative under the sun because you don’t like my writing. Thanks!
People normally interpret other people’s statements according to the context implied. So for example, if I said, “So how come you haven’t given yourself up for committing serial murder?”, people would assume that I think you are a serial murderer, and they might even describe this by saying that I said you were, even though I would not have said that in a technical sense.
In the same way, “Caleb doesn’t have enough karma,” implies the context that he has a Less Wrong account with insufficient karma, and it would be normal to say that you said this, as Lumifer is doing, even if you did not do so in a technical sense. It was in fact quite unnecessary to do this, nor was it necessary to use three sentences. You could have simply said, “Caleb doesn’t have a Less Wrong account yet.”
That said, since he does not appear to have shown up in the comments yet, I rather suspect that you might be the motivating force here and that really he is not all that interested in posting on Less Wrong.
In saying “doesn’t have enough karma,” I was pointing to the obstacle to him posting. It’s easy to get a LW account—takes one minute—but it’s not easy to get karma sufficient to post.
I think you might have missed his comments, his LW name is RevPitkin.
As I said, “intentionally designed to mislead”.
LOL. You’re tripping up on tenses. If Caleb “does not currently have” (present tense), he could not have “got” (past tense). He only could “be getting” (present continuous) or “will get” (future).
I notice that the post in the thread your link leads to says “This post was collaboratively written together with...”
Sure you don’t want to reconsider taking OrphanWilde’s advice?
In saying “doesn’t have enough karma,” I was pointing to the obstacle to him posting. It’s easy to get a LW account—takes one minute—but it’s not easy to get karma sufficient to post. Anyway, I don’t think this thread is helpful to continue anymore.
It is trivially easy. You put up a comment saying “I wish to make a post about this-and-that, but lack karma. I would appreciate gifts of karma so that I could post” and lo and behold! in a few hours at most you have sufficient karma to post.
How much would a user have to know about LW to think to do that? Heck, even I didn’t think of suggesting to Caleb to do that, as that notion didn’t occur to me. You’re failing at other minds.
I’ve seen it happen, and more than once, too. I think all you have to know is that you need a particular quantity of internet points and that people can give them to you for free. You just ask.
I will concede that my expectations of certain LW users might have been too high :-P