to get more upvotes and less downvotes, from me at least, continue to post evidence-based criticisms of other’s faulty points, without unnecessary vitriol.
Considering the strong evidence that lesswrong isn’t nice enough, unnecessary vitriol should always be removed.
Whether a comment with good parts and bad parts (and more good than bad) should get upvotes or downvotes is a complicated question. If votes serve as a signal, probably downvotes, but if they serve as advice on what to read, upvotes.
Considering the strong evidence that lesswrong isn’t nice enough, unnecessary vitriol should always be removed.
I’m curious! I updated my views on lesswrong’s niceness (based on the top-level post about the issue and giving extra weight to the comments section because this is a case about the lesswrong community) to “I don’t have a fucking clue”. And if at all possible I would dearly like to have a clue.
The evidence I saw is that people left because it wasn’t nice enough. No one seemed to think it was too nice, and some people saw drawbacks with increased niceness, but this doesn’t seem like a case where those drawbacks are significant.
to get more upvotes and less downvotes, from me at least, continue to post evidence-based criticisms of other’s faulty points, without unnecessary vitriol.
If 1 line of vitriol followed by >20 lines of ‘evidence-based criticisms’ is still wrong, then I’m not sure I want to be right.
Considering the strong evidence that lesswrong isn’t nice enough, unnecessary vitriol should always be removed.
Whether a comment with good parts and bad parts (and more good than bad) should get upvotes or downvotes is a complicated question. If votes serve as a signal, probably downvotes, but if they serve as advice on what to read, upvotes.
I’m curious! I updated my views on lesswrong’s niceness (based on the top-level post about the issue and giving extra weight to the comments section because this is a case about the lesswrong community) to “I don’t have a fucking clue”. And if at all possible I would dearly like to have a clue.
The evidence I saw is that people left because it wasn’t nice enough. No one seemed to think it was too nice, and some people saw drawbacks with increased niceness, but this doesn’t seem like a case where those drawbacks are significant.