Out of curiosity, what happened that made you change your comment? (and later delete it)
The first time I decided I wasn’t being rude enough. The second time I decided that I was being too rude.
Mind projection fallacy?
Only partially. Unlike you, I have periods where I can actually think clearly.
The same reason there is a law against vigilante justice. In many individual cases it’s probably ethically justified but I certainly support a general rule against it. Because I don’t trust the judgement of all those other f@#$s so take the cooperative mutual suppression of the behavior as the best option.
This is a strong point and perhaps I was undervaluing it. But I wonder why ‘not having sockpuppets’ stands out as a rule that’s so important to uphold and start talking about banning in the name of. It doesn’t seem to have actually caused many problems on LessWrong, and in fact I suspect that not overly discouraging sockpuppets has had a net positive effect, as it has allowed some people to make interesting posts they otherwise wouldn’t have. Of course it has also allowed for some boring people to be boring, so it’s not an obvious question, but its not being obvious also means that talking about banning people for it is in my opinion pretty weird. But maybe you’ve seen sockpuppets become a severe problem on other fora or something? LessWrong is the only forum I have a decent understanding of, but I do think that after many years of painstaking engagement my understanding is rather decent.
That makes sense; to be honest, I generally don’t have a high opinion of narratives and mostly view them as excuses for authors to write about characters and settings and spew insights and jokes. (I also mean this in the metaphorical post-structuralist sense.) This might be why my fiction is so much worse than my nonfiction writing.
This isn’t the should-world. LessWrong is irrevocably a cesspit. The stupid shit will continue to flow. So no, I do not agree with the decision, unless someone like Vladimir_Nesov gets to ban all the stupid shit, which will never happen. Arbitrarily banning my stupid shit in particular just means Eliezer making a fool of himself. There is no sympathetic magic to it that will change the equilibrium.
I did, actually. They didn’t like it.
He almost certainly has or had fake accounts at various times.
I did. I barely used them, and haven’t in a long time. I don’t see why that is banworthy or even against community norms; my other accounts all have positive karma and good upvote/downvote ratios, and with one minor exception I used them for the obvious non-antisocial reasons. IIRC you accused me of being TillNoonsome et al, which is false; the real person behind those accounts offered to reveal their identity to clear my name, but I declined, ’cuz at that point there wasn’t really any need for it. Also you might have noticed that I haven’t engaged in any “insane trolling” for years now. There is no justifiable reason to ban me; the only reason Eliezer would do so is, of course, that he’s a punk-ass bitch.
Hey guys, so, I’m dumb and am continuing to attempt to write fiction. I figured I would post an excerpt first this time so people can point out glaring problems before I post anything to Discussion. I’ve changed some of the premise (as can be seen most obviously in the title); mostly I’m moving away from LessWrong-parody and toward self-parody, mostly because Eliezer’s followers are really whiny and it was distracting from the actual ideas I was trying to convey. The premise is now less disingenuous about its basically being a self-insert fic. Also I’ve tried to incorporate some of the implicit suggestions I received, especially complaints that the first chapter was too in-jokey, pseudo-clever, and insufficiently substantive. This isn’t the whole chapter, it’s just the first part of a first draft. Criticism appreciated!
Harry Potter-Newsome and the Methods of Postrationality: Chapter Two: Analyzing the Fuck out of an Owl: Excerpt
Harry let out a long sigh and addressed the owl with mocking eyes.
“So, owl. About this ‘Hogwarts’. Are there other magical schools out there that I might attend?”
The owl cocked its head. “Why are you asking me? I’m an owl,” said the owl in a voice that sounded like an impossibly rapid sequence of hoots.
“Oh come on. We both know you’re needed for the exposition.”
The owl hooted regretfully. “Fine. Yes, there are other schools. But you should really be asking more interesting questions. Or perhaps I should lead. How did you know to talk to me?”
Harry flashed a look of disappointment. “Although it pains me to say it, I just figured this is the sort of story with talking animals.”
“Pray tell, Mr. Potter, why do you think this is a story in the first place? Most humans who think so are what we owls like to call ‘batshit insane’.”
Harry sighed. This owl is stupid or a troll or both; nonetheless, for the sake of the story, I should probably just go along with it, he thought. “Let’s start with the basics. Riddle me this: how on Earth does someone get a lightning-bolt-shaped scar? Have you ever seen a utensil with a suitably shaped prong? Does an otherwise sane mother decide one day that lightning bolt tattoos are just too expensive and so she should carve her infant son’s forehead with a kitchen knife?”
The owl glanced at Harry’s forehead, and for the first time appeared to be intrigued. “Maybe a neo-Inglorious-Basterd took you as genetically inclined toward Zeus worship and decided they wouldn’t let you hide your depraved Paganism so easily.”
“I hadn’t thought of that,” admitted Harry.
“Or perhaps your parents just read way too much Harry Potter.”
Harry was distraught. “Harry Potter? What, am I a book now?”
The owl paused for a long moment, somehow grimaced, looked downwards, and placed the tip of its wing on its forehead.
[...]
Thanks for the criticism, you’re the first person to give me useful advice. Honestly you probably put more effort into writing this comment than I put into writing my chapter. I really appreciate it. I’ll keep a tab open for this comment next time I attempt to write some fiction.
Try re-writing later? As the saying goes, “Write drunk; edit sober.”
That’s what I did, actually. Maybe I should write sober too. But that Kentucky bourbon was just so inspiring.
For what it’s worth I would love if LessWrong stuck to only decision theory, microeconomics, cognitive science, &c; I’d lurk and do what I could to maintain the relatively high standards of quality that LessWrong used to have. But look at how User:badger’s excellent sequence on mechanism design went basically ignored compared to all the stupid shit that gets upvoted. I posted what I did because LessWrong has mostly been a signaling and self-help cesspit for years now and I thought my post would quietly attract a few readers who enjoyed it while those who didn’t would just downvote and move on. Pissing in a swimming pool is immoral, but I’m pissing in an ocean here.
The post is of quality less than zero.
You aren’t the judge of that, Herr Yudkowsky. LessWrong is the judge of that.
I’ve never upvoted my own posts with sockpuppets. In fact I barely vote at all. Of course I can’t be sure someone else didn’t use their own sockpuppets to upvote my post multiple times.
Sure, I’ll do that. Thanks.
For what it’s worth my fanfic was gonna draw a lot of inspiration from Worm and Pact. Wildbow at least explicitly puts forth metaphysics to partially explain the narrative causality. Maybe Eliezer will get around to it too when the mechanics of Prophecy are explained. His Finale of the Ultimate Meta Mega Crossover is great in that regard.
/shrugs. I know I’m biased and all but I didn’t think it was that terrible. I spent like two hours editing it before posting. People sure are being mean about it though, so idk. I guess maybe I’ll give up on trying to improve my fiction writing skill for now… Maybe it’s a ‘you have it or you don’t’ thing.
I know it’s not good parody. I know I’m a bad writer. That’s why people should downvote it. It’s only the deleting it despite its being upvoted part that I object to.
a discussion post with (at least) 7 upvotes and (at least) 5 comments
It had 17 comments upon deletion. I was actually pretty disappointed because I enjoyed the comments on it and now I can’t see them.
I like how your critique is strong but no one is upvoting your comment because it can’t be used to support any of their petty policy narratives. I’ll upvote it, anyway. ETA: Welp, people are upvoting it now, sweet. Retracting this comment.
are you suggesting that your movement is about writing lame parodies with a few clever jokes in them in order to criticize what you dislike
Yes, Tenoke. That is a completely fair and accurate summary of my “movement”.
It’s impossible to tell now, because presumably people are now voting on the drama, not on the content.