I’d generally say that in any intellectual activity, Examples Are Good.
Also, “Replies to downvoted comments are discouraged. Pay 5 Karma points to proceed anyway”? −4 is enough to shut down a conversation? What a terrible idea. How do we get rid of this mechanism?
-4 is enough to shut down a conversation? What a terrible idea. How do we get rid of this mechanism?
I don’t like it either, but Eliezer seems convinced that long conversations descending from posts by trolls (or, more often, sincere but badly mindkilled people) are destructive enough to site culture that they’re worth going to great lengths to punish.
So, if you want the feature gone, he’s the guy to talk to. Ideally in person.
−4 is enough to shut down a conversation? What a terrible idea.
In practice it doesn’t happen all that often and there is a trivial workaround—start a new (sub)thread quoting the downvoted post and indicate you want to continue talking...
In practice it doesn’t happen all that often and there is a trivial workaround—start a new (sub)thread quoting the downvoted post and indicate you want to continue talking...
Avoiding the karma toll is a recipe for being downvoted, and doing it enough to attract moderator attention is unwise.
What’s the problem with there being too many topics? We don’t have to discuss them all. I find it refreshing to read a well-written consideration of something (i.e. “object level ways to improve people’s lives”). If nothing else, it’s good practice!
I don’t think this website is about object level ways to improve people’s lives. There are far too many topics which fall into this category.
I’d generally say that in any intellectual activity, Examples Are Good.
Also, “Replies to downvoted comments are discouraged. Pay 5 Karma points to proceed anyway”? −4 is enough to shut down a conversation? What a terrible idea. How do we get rid of this mechanism?
I don’t like it either, but Eliezer seems convinced that long conversations descending from posts by trolls (or, more often, sincere but badly mindkilled people) are destructive enough to site culture that they’re worth going to great lengths to punish.
So, if you want the feature gone, he’s the guy to talk to. Ideally in person.
In practice it doesn’t happen all that often and there is a trivial workaround—start a new (sub)thread quoting the downvoted post and indicate you want to continue talking...
Avoiding the karma toll is a recipe for being downvoted, and doing it enough to attract moderator attention is unwise.
What’s the problem with there being too many topics? We don’t have to discuss them all. I find it refreshing to read a well-written consideration of something (i.e. “object level ways to improve people’s lives”). If nothing else, it’s good practice!