✓ Dolphin War finish
✓ lead-in to Sept. 2021 Twitter altercation
✓ out of patience email
-_ Michael Vassar and the Theory of Optimal Gossip
-_ reaction to Ziz
+- Michael Vassar and the Theory of Optimal Gossip
_ plan to reach out to Rick / Michael on creepy men/crazy men
_ State of Steven
+_ reaction to Ziz
_ complicity and friendship
_ repair pt. 5 dath ilan transition
- Eliezerfic fight conclusion
_ maybe I do want to fill in a few more details about the Sasha disaster, conditional on what I end up writing regarding Scott's prosecution?—and conditional on my separate retro email—also the Zolpidem thing
_ mention "Darkest Timeline" and Skyrms somewhere
_ footnote explaining quibbles? (the first time I tried to write this, I hesitated, not sure if necessary)
+_ "it was the same thing here"—most readers are not going to understand what I see as the obvious analogy
pt. 4 edit tier—
_ mention Nick Bostrom email scandal (and his not appearing on the one-sentence CAIS statement)
_ when EY put a checkmark on my Discord message characterizing his strategy as giving up on intellectual honesty
_ cut lots of words from Scotts comments on Jessica's MIRI post (keep: "attempting to erase the agency", Scott blaming my troubles on Michael being absurd)
+dath ilan ancillary tier—
+_ Who are the 9 most important legislators called?
+
+
+things to discuss with Michael/Ben/Jessica—
+_ Anna on Paul Graham
+_ compression of Yudkowsky thinking reasoning wasn't useful
+_ Michael's SLAPP against REACH
+
+
------
With internet available—
_ David Xu? (Is it OK to name him in his LW account?)
_ afford various medical procedures
_ Buck? (get the story about Michael being escorted from events)
-_ A/a alumna??
_ Ray
_ Ruby
-_ Kay Brown?? (assuming I include the delusional emails to her)
+_ Teortaxes??
marketing—
_ Twitter
https://twitter.com/zackmdavis/status/1435856644076830721
> The error in "Not Man for the Categories" is not subtle! After the issue had been brought to your attention, I think you should have been able to condemn it: "Scott's wrong; you can't redefine concepts in order to make people happy; that's retarded." It really is that simple! 4/6
+> It can also be naive to assume that all the damage that people consistently do is unintentional. For that matter, Sam by being "lol you mad" rather than "sorry" is continuing to do that damage. I'd have bought "sorry" rather a lot better, in terms of no ulterior motives.
+https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1706861603029909508
+
+-------
+
+On 27 September 2023, Yudkowsky told Quentin Pope, "If I was given to your sort of attackiness, I'd now compose a giant LW post about how this blatant error demonstrates that nobody should trust you about anything else either." (https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1707142828995031415) I felt like it was an OK use of bandwidth to point out that tracking reputations is sometimes useful (https://twitter.com/zackmdavis/status/1707183146335367243). My agenda here is the same as when I wrote "... on Epistemic Conduct for Author Criticism": I don't want Big Yud using his social power to delegitimize "attacks" in general, because I have an interest in attacking him. Later, he quote-Tweeted something and said,
+
+> People need to grow up reading a lot of case studies like this in order to pick of a well-calibrated instinctive sense of what ignorant criticism typically sounds like. A derisory tone is a very strong base cue, though not an invincible one.
+
+Was he subtweeting me?? (Because I was defending criticism against tone policing, and this is saying tone is a valid cue.) If it was a subtweet, I take that as vindication that my reply was a good use of bandwidth.
+
+-----
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff