3 ms·

Interesting that this comment has two replies: yours: "they aren't criticised more, this is bias of observation on your part" other comment: "that's b/c they

by Chris2048 4y ago

Interesting that this comment has two replies: yours: "they aren't criticised more, this is bias of observation on your part" other comment: "that's b/c they are more tribal!" Observation bias exists, but that doesn't mean there isn't a moderation bias, one way or another. However, I think the distinction of "conservative" is maybe a red-herring - it invites tribalism. As an example, I think people refusing to wear mandated COVID masks are provocative/incorrect. I also believe the authorities (gov and media/corps) are incorrect, and actively biasing scientific discourse. So, is my opinion conservative, or not?

tptacek 4y ago
I don't know what you're asking, but my reply isn't ideologically specific. It applies just as well to liberals. I'm specifically not saying either side is more tribal; I'm saying that we have cognitive biases that make us sensitive to corrections of opinions we agree with, and insensitive to corrections of opinions we disagree with.
- Chris2048 4y ago
  But you didn't say there might be cognitive bias. You stated there was, and implied there is no such bias on HN? I'm not so sure. My question was to imply - there may be talking points, or "biases" considered conservative/liberal, but this is an ambiguous thing. Often, full perspectives are a mixture of both, but people might still be censored on the "perception" of their tribe, or on individual points. As such, the perceived tribes are not a useful distinction to make.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    I just told you what I meant.
happytoexplain 4y ago
Why is it "interesting" that two people have different opinions? It sounds like you're doing that thing where somebody points at one ostensible counterexample with a bit of snideness ("You say global warming is real, but there's a historic snowstorm outside. How interesting."), but I could be misinterpreting.
- Chris2048 4y ago
  I'm not sure how inciting a GW myth is at all relevant. It's interesting b/c someone who appears anti-conservative also agrees, implicitly, that conservatives are represented as more tribal on HN. But that person shouldn't be affected by pro-conservative observation bias (unless they are pro-conservative despite thinking of them as tribal).

tptacek 4y ago

I don't know what you're asking, but my reply isn't ideologically specific. It applies just as well to liberals. I'm specifically not saying either side is more tribal; I'm saying that we have cognitive biases that make us sensitive to corrections of opinions we agree with, and insensitive to corrections of opinions we disagree with.

Chris2048 4y ago
But you didn't say there might be cognitive bias. You stated there was, and implied there is no such bias on HN? I'm not so sure. My question was to imply - there may be talking points, or "biases" considered conservative/liberal, but this is an ambiguous thing. Often, full perspectives are a mixture of both, but people might still be censored on the "perception" of their tribe, or on individual points. As such, the perceived tribes are not a useful distinction to make.
- tptacek 4y ago
  I just told you what I meant.

happytoexplain 4y ago

Why is it "interesting" that two people have different opinions? It sounds like you're doing that thing where somebody points at one ostensible counterexample with a bit of snideness ("You say global warming is real, but there's a historic snowstorm outside. How interesting."), but I could be misinterpreting.

Chris2048 4y ago
I'm not sure how inciting a GW myth is at all relevant. It's interesting b/c someone who appears anti-conservative also agrees, implicitly, that conservatives are represented as more tribal on HN. But that person shouldn't be affected by pro-conservative observation bias (unless they are pro-conservative despite thinking of them as tribal).