Pardon my sloppy phrasing, I was rushing this out with my thumb because the GP was going grey fast. I meant that in the “karma bombing” sense as far as “explic

Pardon my sloppy phrasing, I was rushing this out with my thumb because the GP was going grey fast. I meant that in the “karma bombing” sense as far as “explicitly” goes. And I should be more clear in both this subthread (as well as one other comment) that the guidelines I’m referring to aren’t the succinct ones on the literal guidelines page, but rather the evolved apparent consensus under “the @dang administration”. This is a pretty natural and healthy seeming extrapolation of the idea that rigor should go up as contentiousness goes up, something I personally fail in too often even these days, but will always apologize for failing in. Threads about OpenAI have set a new record for karma bombing proportional to front-page exposure, blowing away classics like crypto and social media and patent law, I’ve got at least one or two tuples of adjacent comments where the high-quality one got bombed and was on a #1 submission and the far worse form of the argument got too many upvotes on a less-engaged submission. I’ll decline (for now at least) to speculate on the mechanism/explanation around this (apparent) trend, but it’s inching into “concerning”.