I absolutely do think LW at large is trying to understand the truth about that bill, yes. I’m sure there are some exceptions, but I’d be surprised if there were many LWers willing to actively deceive people about its consequences—LWers typically really hate lying.
Your statement is not just technically incorrect, but mostly incorrect. Incompetence explains many more wrong statement than malice. I’m not going to change your mind on that right now, but it’s something I think about an awful lot, and I think the evidence strongly supports it.
More importantly, your statement sounds mean, which is enough to not want it on LW. People being rude and not extending the benefit of the doubt leads to a community that argues instead of collaboratively seeking the truth. Arguing has huge but subtle downsides for reaching the truth—motivated reasoning from the combative relationships in arguments leads people to solidify their beliefs instead of changing them as the evidence suggests.
I believe the “about LW” page requests that we extend benefit of the doubt and be not just civil, but polite. If not, the community at large still does this, and it seems to work.
This has nothing to do with my support or lack of SBb-1047; I don’t even know if I do support it, because I find such legislation’s first-order effects to be pointless. My comment is merely about truth and how to obtain it. Being mean is not how you get at the truth.
I absolutely do think LW at large is trying to understand the truth about that bill, yes. I’m sure there are some exceptions, but I’d be surprised if there were many LWers willing to actively deceive people about its consequences—LWers typically really hate lying.
Your statement is not just technically incorrect, but mostly incorrect. Incompetence explains many more wrong statement than malice. I’m not going to change your mind on that right now, but it’s something I think about an awful lot, and I think the evidence strongly supports it.
More importantly, your statement sounds mean, which is enough to not want it on LW. People being rude and not extending the benefit of the doubt leads to a community that argues instead of collaboratively seeking the truth. Arguing has huge but subtle downsides for reaching the truth—motivated reasoning from the combative relationships in arguments leads people to solidify their beliefs instead of changing them as the evidence suggests.
I believe the “about LW” page requests that we extend benefit of the doubt and be not just civil, but polite. If not, the community at large still does this, and it seems to work.
This has nothing to do with my support or lack of SBb-1047; I don’t even know if I do support it, because I find such legislation’s first-order effects to be pointless. My comment is merely about truth and how to obtain it. Being mean is not how you get at the truth.