3 ms·

I think the idea is that it's forgivable to make mistakes, as long as you aren't also being unpleasant.

mehrdadn 7y ago
Edit: Sorry, I just realized I misread something. What I was pondering was what "necessary" meant in this case, but I think my brain is tired right now!
- adamisom 7y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean by 'mistaken unpleasantness', but getting at the truth, however unpleasant, is a far higher and more widespread norm in the rationalist community.
- red_admiral 7y ago
  From https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/02/the-comment-policy-is-victorian-sufi-buddha-lite/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/02/the-comment-policy-is-... : {necessary, kind}: > Recognizing that nobody can be totally sure what is or isn’t true, if you want to say something that might not be true – anything controversial, speculative, or highly opinionated – then you had better make sure it is both kind and necessary. Kind, in that you don’t rush to insult people who disagree with you. Necessary in that it’s on topic, and not only contributes something to the discussion but contributes more to the discussion than it’s likely to take away through starting a fight. {true, kind}: > Annnnnnd sometimes you might want to share something that’s not especially relevant, not the most important thing in the world – but if you do that it had better be both true and kind. No random interjection of toxic opinions that are going to cause World War III. No unprovoked attacks. (personal comment - the recent HN thread on castle Guedelon, where a bunch of experimental archaeologists are building a medieval-style castle, was perhaps not "necessary" or "relevant" on a tech forum, but it was kind in that I very much enjoyed the half hour I was reading about it. Since there were no false claims about castles on that page, I'd count that as "true and kind".) For good measure, {true, necessary}: > Nobody can be kind all the time, but if you are going to be angry or sarcastic, what you say had better be both true and necessary. You had better be delivering a very well-deserved smackdown against someone who is uncontroversially and obviously wrong, in a way you can back up with universally agreed-upon statistics.

Edit: Sorry, I just realized I misread something. What I was pondering was what "necessary" meant in this case, but I think my brain is tired right now!

adamisom 7y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by 'mistaken unpleasantness', but getting at the truth, however unpleasant, is a far higher and more widespread norm in the rationalist community.
red_admiral 7y ago
From https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/02/the-comment-policy-is-victorian-sufi-buddha-lite/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/02/the-comment-policy-is-... : {necessary, kind}: > Recognizing that nobody can be totally sure what is or isn’t true, if you want to say something that might not be true – anything controversial, speculative, or highly opinionated – then you had better make sure it is both kind and necessary. Kind, in that you don’t rush to insult people who disagree with you. Necessary in that it’s on topic, and not only contributes something to the discussion but contributes more to the discussion than it’s likely to take away through starting a fight. {true, kind}: > Annnnnnd sometimes you might want to share something that’s not especially relevant, not the most important thing in the world – but if you do that it had better be both true and kind. No random interjection of toxic opinions that are going to cause World War III. No unprovoked attacks. (personal comment - the recent HN thread on castle Guedelon, where a bunch of experimental archaeologists are building a medieval-style castle, was perhaps not "necessary" or "relevant" on a tech forum, but it was kind in that I very much enjoyed the half hour I was reading about it. Since there were no false claims about castles on that page, I'd count that as "true and kind".) For good measure, {true, necessary}: > Nobody can be kind all the time, but if you are going to be angry or sarcastic, what you say had better be both true and necessary. You had better be delivering a very well-deserved smackdown against someone who is uncontroversially and obviously wrong, in a way you can back up with universally agreed-upon statistics.