Get curious. If I disagree with someone, what might they be thinking; what are the moving parts of their beliefs? What model do I think they are running? Ask yourself—what about this topic do I not understand? What evidence could I get, or what evidence do I already have?
Agree that curiosity is important, but it’s just really hard to sustain that when I have trouble understanding almost all of your comments. We get a lot of spam that I need to deal with quickly, so your comments and content fell prey to that pressure.
Your two comments today were a lot clearer, and while I think they weren’t great, I think it makes sense to give you another chance. I do think that a lot of the comments you made were basically indecipherable, and ended up taking up quite a bit of bandwidth on the site without producing much value. They also were pretty universally downvoted, so I wasn’t the only one with that problem. If that continues, we will enforce the ban.
Sorry for the confusing comments. The information I am sharing was deliberately dispersed into separate channels to prevent them from being casually combined into an active concept with a high viral capacity. Most of the dispersed comments were intended for an answer to a single reply to my topic thread and a discussion with one significant poster who did reply. I also received several upvotes and thanks for some of my other comments. Please be considerate of banning people with mixed reviews. A good review and a bad one should not result in a banishment should it? Do you have the ability to search for an put all my content together for making a decision? It’s kind of easy and more wrong to take one or even 5 comments from anyone that upset someone and ignore a lot of good ones if that’s your MO.
Update: Steve Whetstone is banned for spamming lots of really long crackpoty looking comments
Frontpage commenting guidelines:
Get curious. If I disagree with someone, what might they be thinking; what are the moving parts of their beliefs? What model do I think they are running? Ask yourself—what about this topic do I not understand? What evidence could I get, or what evidence do I already have?
Agree that curiosity is important, but it’s just really hard to sustain that when I have trouble understanding almost all of your comments. We get a lot of spam that I need to deal with quickly, so your comments and content fell prey to that pressure.
Your two comments today were a lot clearer, and while I think they weren’t great, I think it makes sense to give you another chance. I do think that a lot of the comments you made were basically indecipherable, and ended up taking up quite a bit of bandwidth on the site without producing much value. They also were pretty universally downvoted, so I wasn’t the only one with that problem. If that continues, we will enforce the ban.
Ok, thanks for re-instating my original account. Will that reactivate my discussion topic “discussion of society scale benefits. . . ” https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/CLMh2Ne7D2H9EaXzy/discussion-re-implementation-of-society-scale-benefits-that ? I see that it did not. Perhaps you decided to renege on your plan to lift the ban?
Sorry for the confusing comments. The information I am sharing was deliberately dispersed into separate channels to prevent them from being casually combined into an active concept with a high viral capacity. Most of the dispersed comments were intended for an answer to a single reply to my topic thread and a discussion with one significant poster who did reply. I also received several upvotes and thanks for some of my other comments. Please be considerate of banning people with mixed reviews. A good review and a bad one should not result in a banishment should it? Do you have the ability to search for an put all my content together for making a decision? It’s kind of easy and more wrong to take one or even 5 comments from anyone that upset someone and ignore a lot of good ones if that’s your MO.