From 1bb0a20321f7ee0f3f0645d49b2b8791397d6336 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Zack M. Davis" Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 22:20:56 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] check in --- content/drafts/zevis-choice.md | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++------ notes/memoir-sections.md | 28 ++++++++++++++++------------ 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/drafts/zevis-choice.md b/content/drafts/zevis-choice.md index 21cbcb8..963ef1b 100644 --- a/content/drafts/zevis-choice.md +++ b/content/drafts/zevis-choice.md @@ -336,7 +336,7 @@ Eventually, you would get used to it, but at first, I think this would be legiti This is a pretty bad situation to be in—to be faced with the question, "Am _I_ crazy, or is _everyone else_ crazy?" But one thing that would make it slightly less bad is if you had a few allies, or even just _an_ ally—someone to confirm that the obvious answer, "It's not you," is, in fact, obvious. -But in a world where [everyone who's anyone](https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2019/07/02/everybody-knows/) agrees that thunder comes before lightning—including all the savvy consequentialists who realize that being someone who's anyone is an instrumentally convergent strategy for acquiring influence—anyone who would be so imprudent to take your everyone-is-lying-about-lightning concerns seriously, would have to be someone with ... a nonstandard relationship to social reality. Someone meta-savvy to the process of people wanting to be someone who's anyone. Someone who, honestly, is probably some kind of _major asshole_. Someone like—Michael Vassar! +But in a world where [everyone who's anyone](https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2019/07/02/everybody-knows/) agrees that thunder comes before lightning—including all the savvy consequentialists who realize that being someone who's anyone is an instrumentally convergent strategy for acquiring influence—anyone who would be so imprudent to take your everyone-is-lying-about-lightning concerns seriously, would have to be someone with ... a nonstandard relationship to social reality. Someone meta-savvy to the process of people wanting to be someone who's anyone. Someone who, bluntly, can be kind of an asshole. Someone like—Michael Vassar! From the perspective of an outside observer playing a Kolmogorov-complicity strategy, your plight might look like "innocent person suffering from mental illness in need of treatment/management", and your ally as "bad influence who is egging the innocent person on for their own unknown but probably nefarious reasons". If that outside observer chooses to draw the category boundaries of "mental illness" appropriately, that story might even be true. So why not quit making such a fuss, and accept treatment? Why fight, if fighting comes at a personal cost? Why not submit? @@ -346,18 +346,32 @@ To assess whether joining the "Vassarites" had been harmful to me, one would nee Additionally, it was really obnoxious when people had tried to use my association with Michael to try to discredit the content of what I was saying—interpreting me as Michael's pawn. Gwen, one of the "Zizians", in a blog post about her grievances against CfAR, has [a section on "Attempting to erase the agency of everyone who agrees with our position"](https://everythingtosaveit.how/case-study-cfar/#attempting-to-erase-the-agency-of-everyone-who-agrees-with-our-position), complaining about how people try to cast her and Somni and Emma as Ziz's minions, rather than acknowledging that they're separate people with their own ideas who had good reasons to work together. I empathized a lot with this. My thing, and separately Ben Hoffman's [thing about Effective Altruism](http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/drowning-children-rare/), and separately Jessica's thing in the OP, didn't really have a whole lot to do with each other, except as symptoms of "the so-called 'rationalist' community is not doing what it says on the tin" (which itself wasn't a very specific diagnosis). But insofar as our separate problems did have a hypothesized common root cause, it made sense for us to talk to each other and to Michael about them. -Was Michael using me, at various times? I mean, probably. But just as much, _I was using him_. Particularly with the November 2018–April 2019 thing (where I and the "Vassarite" posse kept repeatedly pestering Scott and Eliezer to clarify that categories aren't arbitrary): that was the "Vassarites" doing an _enormous_ favor for _me_ and _my_ agenda. (If Michael and crew hadn't had my back, I wouldn't have been anti-social enough to keep escalating.) And here Scott was trying to get away with claiming that _they_ were making my situation worse? That's _absurd_. Had he no shame? +Was Michael using me, at various times? I mean, probably. But just as much, _I was using him_. Particularly with [the November 2018–April 2019 thing](/2023/Jul/a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning/) (where I and the "Vassarite" posse kept repeatedly pestering Scott and Eliezer to clarify that categories aren't arbitrary): that was the "Vassarites" doing an enormous favor for me and my agenda. (If Michael and crew hadn't had my back, I wouldn't have been anti-social enough to keep escalating.) And here Scott was trying to get away with claiming that _they_ were making my situation worse? That was absurd. Had he no shame? -I _did_, I admitted, have some specific, nuanced concerns—especially since the December 2020 psychiatric disaster, with some nagging doubts beforehand—about ways in which being an inner-circle "Vassarite" might be bad for someone, but at the moment, I was focused on rebutting Scott's story, which was _silly_. A defense lawyer has an easier job than a rationalist—if the prosecution makes a terrible case, you can just destroy it, without it being your job to worry about whether your client is separately guilty of vaguely similar crimes that the incompetent prosecution can't prove. +I did, I admitted, have some specific, nuanced concerns—especially since the December 2020 psychiatric disaster, with some nagging doubts beforehand—about ways in which being an inner-circle "Vassarite" might be bad for someone, but at the moment, I was focused on rebutting Scott's story, which was _silly_. A defense lawyer has an easier job than a rationalist—if the prosecution makes a terrible case, you can just destroy it, without it being your job to worry about whether your client is separately guilty of vaguely similar crimes that the incompetent prosecution can't prove. -When Scott expressed concern about the group-yelling behavior that [Ziz had described in a blog comment](https://sinceriously.fyi/punching-evil/#comment-2345) ("They spent 8 hours shouting at me, gaslighting me") and [Yudkowsky had described on Twitter](https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1356494768960798720) ("When MichaelV and co. try to run a 'multiple people yelling at you' operation on me, I experience that as 'lol, look at all that pressure' instead _feeling pressured_"), I clarified that that thing was very different from what it was like to actually be friends with them. The everyone-yelling operation seemed like a new innovation (that I didn't like) that they wield as a psychological weapon only against people who they think are operating in bad faith? In the present conversation with Scott, I had been focusing on rebutting the claim that my February–April 2017 (major) and March 2019 (minor) psych problems were caused by the "Vassarites", because with regard to those _specific_ incidents, the charge was absurd and false. But, well ... my January 2021 (minor) psych problems actually _were_ the result of being on the receiving end of the everyone-yelling thing. I briefly described the December 2020 "Lenore" disaster, and in particular the part where Michael/Jessica/Jack yelled at me. +[TODO— straighten this out— + +Scott expressed concern about reports of + + [Ziz had described in a blog comment](https://sinceriously.fyi/punching-evil/#comment-2345) ("They spent 8 hours shouting at me, gaslighting me") and [Yudkowsky had described on Twitter](https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1356494768960798720) ("When MichaelV and co. try to run a 'multiple people yelling at you' operation on me, I experience that as 'lol, look at all that pressure' instead _feeling pressured_") + + * I thought I recognized the behavior being described that thing was very different from what it was like to actually be friends with them. + + * However, when I ran an earlier draft of this post by them, they pointed out that "arguing passionately" can be adversarially interpreted as "yelling" by someone who doesn't want to hear it + +The everyone-yelling operation seemed like a new innovation (that I didn't like) that they wield as a psychological weapon only against people who they think are operating in bad faith? + +> Jessica called me transphobic scum; Michael said that I should have never been born, that I should be contemplating suicide, that I could barely begin to make up what I owe to Sasha if I gave her everything I own; Jack said that I'm only useful as an example of how bad other people should feel, if they knew what I knew. At midnight, I actually was on the edge of psychosis—there's this very distinct fear-of-Hell sensation—but because I had been there before and knew what was happening to me, and because I already knew not to take Michael literally, I was able to force myself to lie down and get some sleep and not immediately go crazy, although I did struggle for the next month. (I ended up taking a week off of my dayjob and got a Seroquel perscription from Kaiser.) + +] + +In the present conversation with Scott, I had been focusing on rebutting the claim that my February–April 2017 (major) and March 2019 (minor) psych problems were caused by the "Vassarites", because with regard to those _specific_ incidents, the charge was absurd and false. But, well ... my January 2021 (minor) psych problems actually _were_ the result of being on the receiving end of the everyone-yelling thing. I briefly described the December 2020 disaster, and in particular the part where Michael/Jessica/Jack yelled at me. Scott said that based on my and others' testimony, he was updating away from Vassar being as involved in psychotic breaks than he thought, but towards thinking Vassar was worse in other ways than he thought. He felt sorry for my bad December 2020/January 2021 experience—so much that he could feel it through the triumphant vindication at getting conifrmation that the Vassarites were behaving badly in ways he couldn't previously prove. Great, I said, I was happy to provide information to help hold people (including Michael as a particular instance of "people") accountable for the specific bad things that they're actually guilty of, rather than scapegoated as a Bad Man with mysterious witch powers. -Scott supposed that he should also be investigating "Lenore", who he sarcastically remarked was liable to be yet another case of someone having a psychotic break just as she was getting close to the Vassarites, but that somehow there's no plausible connection between those two things. - I pointed out that that's exactly what one would expect if the Vassar/breakdown correlation was mostly a selection effect rather than causal—that is, if the causal graph was the fork "prone-to-psychosis ← underlying-bipolar-ish-condition → gets-along-with-Michael". I had also had a sleep-deprivation-induced-psychotic-break-with-hospitalization in February 2013, and shortly thereafter, I remember Anna remarking that I was sounding a lot like Michael. But I hadn't been talking to Michael at all beforehand! (My previous email conversation with him had been in 2010.) So what could Anna's brain have been picking up on, when she said that? My guess: there was some underlying dimension of psychological variation (psychoticism? bipolar?—you tell me; this is supposed to be Scott's professional specialty) where Michael and I were already weird/crazy in similar ways, and sufficiently bad stressors could push me further along that dimension (enough for Anna to notice). Was Scott also going to blame Yudkowsky for making people [autistic](https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1633396201427984384)? diff --git a/notes/memoir-sections.md b/notes/memoir-sections.md index cce86b9..7103af1 100644 --- a/notes/memoir-sections.md +++ b/notes/memoir-sections.md @@ -2,13 +2,12 @@ first edit pass bookmark: "I got a chance to talk to" time-sensitive globals TODOs— ✓ address red team objections to pt. 3 -- apply pro edits to pt. 3 -- address auto edit tier to pt. 3 -_ schedule Friendship Day at Valinor +✓ schedule Friendship Day at Valinor +✓ apply pro edits to pt. 3 +✓ address auto edit tier to pt. 3 +- rephrase "everyone-yelling operation" in pt. 5 _ consult Anna _ clear with Steven -_ Jessica's dramapost § in pt. 5 -_ consult 93 about Jessica's dramapost § _ finish and ship "Reply to Scott on Autogenderphilia" _ finish and ship "Hrunkner Unnerby" _ psychiatric disaster private doc @@ -30,24 +29,25 @@ pt. 3 edit tier (auto edition)— ✓ revert alphabet names (from 17638259f20) ✓ narcissistic delusions ✓ clarify that cheerful price history is with Anna specifically -_ screenshot "pleading, snarky reply" -_ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links +✓ screenshot "pleading, snarky reply" +✓ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links +✓ return on cognitive investment +✓ establish usage of "coordination group" vs. "posse" (posse) +✓ do I have a better identifier than "Vassarite" ---- +_ Ruby fight included ban threat, "forces of blandness want me gone ... stand my ground" remark _ breakup song _ briefly speculate on causes of brain damage (tie in to moderation policy?) _ being friends with dogs (it's good, but do I have the wordcount budget?) -_ Ruby fight: "forces of blandness want me gone ... stand my ground" remark _ mention that I was miffed about "Boundaries?" not getting Curated, while one of Euk's animal posts did _ explicitly mention http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/bad-faith-behavior-not-feeling/ _ meeting with Ray (maybe?) _ mention Said rigor check somewhere, nervousness about Michael's gang being a mini-egregore _ I should respond to Ziz's charges that my criticism of concept-policing was a form of concept-policing _ Anna's claim that Scott was a target specifically because he was good, my counterclaim that payment can't be impunity -_ do I have a better identifier than "Vassarite"? _ 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 _ the "reducing negativity" post does obliquely hint at the regression point being general _ link to protest flyer -_ establish usage of "coordination group" vs. "posse"? (editor might catch?) _ "it was the same thing here"—most readers are not going to see an obvious analogy (editor might catch?) _ better explanation of MOPs in "Social Reality" scuffle (editor might catch?) _ better context on "scam" &c. earlier (editor might catch?) @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ _ "Not Man for the Categories" keeps getting cited _ the hill he wants to die on _ humans have honor instead of TDT. "That's right! I'm appealing to your honor!" _ Leeroy Jenkins Option +_ consult 93 about Jessica's dramapost § _ historical non-robot-cult rationality wisdom _ work in the "some clever gambit to play trans activists and gender-critical feminists against each other" _ finale: mention that I'm not doing the dumb reversed-stupidity thing @@ -116,12 +117,15 @@ _ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links things to discuss with Michael/Ben/Jessica— _ Anna on Paul Graham _ Yudkowsky thinking reasoning wasn't useful -_ Jessica brought up race & IQ (she skimmed the previous draft, so I should highlight this) +_ Jessica brought up race & IQ (she skimmed the previous draft, so I should highlight), or calling Ruby a MOP _ Ben publish "Discursive Warfare and Faction Formation" doc? -_ quick note about FTX +_ footnote about FTX +_ revision of "yelling" description _ Michael's SLAPP against REACH (new) _ Michael on creepy and crazy men (new) _ elided Sasha disaster (new) +_ what should I say to Iceman? +_ "yelling" pt. 3–5 prereaders— -- 2.17.1