_ examples of "bitter and insulting" comments about rationalists
_ cut words from descriptions of other posts! (if people want to read them, they can click through)
_ explicitly mention http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/bad-faith-behavior-not-feeling/
-
-
-
+_ cut words from NRx denouncement Jessica discussion
+_ "I" statements
+_ we can go stronger than "I definitely don't think Yudkowsky _thinks of himself_ as having given up on Speech _in those words_"
+_ try to clarify Abram's categories view (Michael didn't get it)
+_ cut lots of words from December 2019 blogging spree
+_ in a footnote, defend the "cutting my dick off" rhetorical flourish
+_ mention Nick Bostrom email scandal (and his not appearing on the one-sentence CAIS statement)
+_ somewhere: mention that "Not Man for the Categories" keeps getting cited
+_ revise and cut words from "bad faith" section since can link to "Assume Bad Faith"
+_ cut words from January 2020 Twitter exchange (after war criminal defenses)
+_ revise reply to Xu
+_ 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)
TODO blocks—
_ "Lenore" psychiatric disaster
- Eliezerfic fight conclusion
_ Michael Vassar and the Theory of Optimal Gossip
-_ plan to reach out to Rick
-- regrets, wasted time, conclusion
+_ plan to reach out to Rick / Michael on creepy men/crazy men
_ reaction to Ziz
_ State of Steven
-_ culture off the rails; my warning points to Vaniver
_ complicity and friendship
_ out of patience email
_ the hill he wants to die on
_ recap of crimes, cont'd
_ lead-in to Sept. 2021 Twitter altercation
_ Dolphin War finish
-_ Michael on creepy men/crazy men
+_ "Agreeing With Stalin" intro recap
------
Scott November 2020: "I think we eventually ended up on the same page"
https://www.datasecretslox.com/index.php/topic,1553.msg38799.html#msg38799
-> Or see ["A Fable of Science and Politics"](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6hfGNLf4Hg5DXqJCF/a-fable-of-science-and-politics), where the editorial tone is pretty clear that we're supposed to be like Daria or Ferris, not Charles.
-
-(This being a parable about an underground Society polarized into factions with different beliefs about the color of the unseen sky, and how different types of people react to the discovery of a passageway to the overworld which reveals that the sky is blue. Daria (formerly of the Green faction) steels herself to accept the unpleasant truth. Ferris reacts with delighted curiosity. Charles, thinking only of preserving the existing social order and unconcerned with what the naïve would call "facts", _blocks off the passageway_.)
+SK on never making a perfectly correct point
+https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/P3FQNvnW8Cz42QBuA/dialogue-on-appeals-to-consequences#Z8haBdrGiRQcGSXye
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff