IIRC, Eliezer banned Richard from SL4 several years ago. I can’t find the thread in which Eliezer banned him, but here is a thread in which Eliezer writes (to Richard) “I am wondering whether to ban you from SL4...”
After a few counter-productive discussions with Richard, I’ve personally stopped communicating with him.
Note that I’ve personally had many productive discussions with Richard: he does have a bit of a temper, which is compounded by a history of bad experiences with communities such as SL4 and this one, but he’s a very reasonable debate partner when treated with courtesy and respect.
It says something profound about the LessWrong community that:
(a) Whenever I post a remark, no matter how innocent, Luke Muehlhauser makes a point of coming to the thread to make defamatory remarks against me personally ….. and his comment is upvoted;
(b) When I, the victim of Muehlhauser’s attack, point out that there is objective evidence to show that the defamation is baseless and unjustified …. my comment is immediately downvoted.
I was not aware of the prior history, but I tend to downvote anyone coming across as a bitter asshole with an ax to grind.
Ditto. I hypothesise that if Richard had used a few different words here and there to take out the overt barbs he may have far more effectively achieved his objective of gaining the moral high ground and making his adversaries look bad.
I’d rather not phrase it in terms of adversaries but the basic point that people would be more inclined to listen to Richard if he was less combative is probably accurate.
IIRC, Eliezer banned Richard from SL4 several years ago. I can’t find the thread in which Eliezer banned him, but here is a thread in which Eliezer writes (to Richard) “I am wondering whether to ban you from SL4...”
After a few counter-productive discussions with Richard, I’ve personally stopped communicating with him.
The “bannination” is here.
EDIT: and here is Eliezer’s explanation.
Note that I’ve personally had many productive discussions with Richard: he does have a bit of a temper, which is compounded by a history of bad experiences with communities such as SL4 and this one, but he’s a very reasonable debate partner when treated with courtesy and respect.
It says something profound about the LessWrong community that:
(a) Whenever I post a remark, no matter how innocent, Luke Muehlhauser makes a point of coming to the thread to make defamatory remarks against me personally ….. and his comment is upvoted;
(b) When I, the victim of Muehlhauser’s attack, point out that there is objective evidence to show that the defamation is baseless and unjustified …. my comment is immediately downvoted.
It says something profound about the ten or so people who have voted on your recent comments, assuming none of the votes come from the same person.
I was not aware of the prior history, but I tend to downvote anyone coming across as a bitter asshole with an ax to grind.
Ditto. I hypothesise that if Richard had used a few different words here and there to take out the overt barbs he may have far more effectively achieved his objective of gaining the moral high ground and making his adversaries look bad.
I’d rather not phrase it in terms of adversaries but the basic point that people would be more inclined to listen to Richard if he was less combative is probably accurate.