Eyes batting like mad over here. I’ve only ever heard that construction applied to actual members of the organization, e.g. “our swing dancing club has two new parents”, or “our Thursday morning playgroup has two new toddlers”.
Keep in mind that the NYC community is a physical tight-knit community in a way that LW or even a swing dancing club isn’t. (I live in SF and expect a great deal of cooperative parenting if and when the LWers there start breeding en masse.)
I wouldn’t describe a baby as a LWer on the basis of their parents’ affiliation any more than I would describe them as a Christian, a Democrat, or a heterosexual.
While I found chaosmosis’ comment slightly ill formed I agree that their proposed wording is better than the original wording, which just sounded off to me.
This sounded a bit cultish. Babies aren’t the property of LessWrong.
Sounds better.
I think you’re being oversensitive—if I said the NYC Swing Dancing Club had two babies, I don’t think anyone would bat an eye.
Eyes batting like mad over here. I’ve only ever heard that construction applied to actual members of the organization, e.g. “our swing dancing club has two new parents”, or “our Thursday morning playgroup has two new toddlers”.
It wouldn’t sound cultish or anything, but it’d still sound “weird” to me.
Keep in mind that the NYC community is a physical tight-knit community in a way that LW or even a swing dancing club isn’t. (I live in SF and expect a great deal of cooperative parenting if and when the LWers there start breeding en masse.)
That makes it worse?
Amused that Saliency of all people is getting accused of being phygish.
I know, right?? laughs
Nobody said the babies are the property of Less Wrong. But they are presumably part of the community.
I wouldn’t describe a baby as a LWer on the basis of their parents’ affiliation any more than I would describe them as a Christian, a Democrat, or a heterosexual.
No they aren’t? Babies aren’t too interested or capable of increasing their rationality. or making decisions.
I believe at least one of us has a deep misapprehension of what a community is.
While I found chaosmosis’ comment slightly ill formed I agree that their proposed wording is better than the original wording, which just sounded off to me.