I think there should be a “tax on criticism”, especially if it is such a cheap one as this—having to explain yourself if questioned is in a sense really just politeness! Default behavior rewards criticism too much, especially in a contrarian community like this one.
Note also that I have this norm in mind for public discourse, which I think some of the more extreme cases you brought up may not be.
So, this depends on what is meant by “explain yourself if questioned”. If I’m allowed to say “my research aesthetics say this project is useless, and I can point to a couple details, but not enough to convince that many others”, or, “I had some negative experiences in relation to this organization that lead me to believe that it’s causing harm, and I can share a few details, but others are confidential” then, fine. But, such justification norms could (and probably should) naturally apply to praise as well.
I think both of those are basically fine. The thing that I’m more worried about is stuff like:
Alice: “This organization is unethical, you shouldn’t support it”
Bob: “Why?”
Alice: *no response*
It’s very understandable that one might not be able to share all their evidence or fully explicate everything, but I think that providing at least some information is important.
I think there should be a “tax on criticism”, especially if it is such a cheap one as this—having to explain yourself if questioned is in a sense really just politeness! Default behavior rewards criticism too much, especially in a contrarian community like this one.
Note also that I have this norm in mind for public discourse, which I think some of the more extreme cases you brought up may not be.
So, this depends on what is meant by “explain yourself if questioned”. If I’m allowed to say “my research aesthetics say this project is useless, and I can point to a couple details, but not enough to convince that many others”, or, “I had some negative experiences in relation to this organization that lead me to believe that it’s causing harm, and I can share a few details, but others are confidential” then, fine. But, such justification norms could (and probably should) naturally apply to praise as well.
I think both of those are basically fine. The thing that I’m more worried about is stuff like:
It’s very understandable that one might not be able to share all their evidence or fully explicate everything, but I think that providing at least some information is important.
Sure, this seems reasonable. I am also worried about content-free praise, but, independent of that, content-free criticism seems good to discourage.