A related comment is that I think fora, as opposed to email lists, tend to promote a lower level of repetitiveness than email lists. The AGIRI website has a forum but it is rarely used
http://www.agiri.org/forum/index.php?s=a1da5a9cd51e59a290ca6ad5ac0b35ca&showforum=22 If we were using a forum rather than a mailing list, then for instance there could be a single forum thread devoted to Richard's Complex Systems Argument, and discussion on that topic would occur in that thread. Those who don't care about this argument would not need to read that thread. And anyone who wanted to post there could easily read the prior arguments and counterarguments made. I personally would rather use the forums than the mailing list because I feel it would promote a higher quality of discussion; however, it seems that a significant community has built up on this list, and I don't see how as a matter of practice to simply port this community to the forums. The forums at Immortality Institute (imminst.org) have consistently maintained a fairly high quality of posts, I feel; more so than the majority of future-tech-oriented email lists. thoughts? Ben On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Here are a couple random responses to suggestions by others within this > thread... > > Nesov wrote, and Mark Waser concurred: > > " > I don't notice rudeness so much, but content-free posts (and posters > who don't learn) are a problem on this list. Low signal-to-noise > ratio. I'd say you are too tolerant in avoiding moderation, but > moderation is needed for content, not just "politeness". > " > > My response is that > > -- Moderation for politeness, and for *form* of posts, is fairly easy to do > in an objective way > > -- Moderation for content is a lot more subjective, and I don't want to be > perceived as imposing my own particular views on AGI on this mailing list. > So I'm a bit wary of this. > > Hector suggested > > " > What about also some minimal credentials (not necessarily academical > achievements but a minimal proof of knowledge and logical thought) as it is > required at other mailing lists... > " > > However, it seems to me that the most boring, repetitive and irritating > conversations on this list generally involve individuals who *do* have > "above minimal credentials" in AGI. > > The only exception I can think of would be some of the repetitive > conversations involving Mike Tintner, who isn't professionally experienced > in AGI or directly related fields of science so far as I know (though I > could be wrong) > > I do think that this list has recently become dominated by long, somewhat > repetitive arguments between a relatively small number of people. I myself > have stopped reading or posting very much partly because of this, even > though I'm the list administrator... > > > Ben > > > > On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I don't notice rudeness so much, but content-free posts (and posters >>> who don't learn) are a problem on this list. Low signal-to-noise >>> ratio. I'd say you are too tolerant in avoiding moderation, but >>> moderation is needed for content, not just "politeness". >>> >> >> Normally I try to avoid "me too" posts -- but for those who felt my last >> e-mail was too long, this is the essence of my argument (and very well >> expressed). >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vladimir Nesov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 8:25 AM >> Subject: Re: [agi] META: do we need a stronger "politeness code" on this >> list? >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 7:47 AM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I think Ed's email was a bit harsh, but not as harsh as many of >>>> Richard's >>>> (which are frequently full of language like "fools", "rubbish" and so >>>> forth >>>> ...). >>>> >>>> Some of your emails have been pretty harsh in the past too. >>>> >>>> I would be willing to enforce a stronger code of politeness on this list >>>> if >>>> that is what the membership wants. I have been told before, in other >>>> contexts, that I tend to be overly tolerant of rude behavior. >>>> >>>> Anyone else have an opinion on this? >>>> >>>> >>> I don't notice rudeness so much, but content-free posts (and posters >>> who don't learn) are a problem on this list. Low signal-to-noise >>> ratio. I'd say you are too tolerant in avoiding moderation, but >>> moderation is needed for content, not just "politeness". >>> >>> -- >>> Vladimir Nesov >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> http://causalityrelay.wordpress.com/ >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> agi >>> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >>> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ >>> Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >>> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> agi >> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ >> Modify Your Subscription: >> https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >> > > > > -- > Ben Goertzel, PhD > CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC > Director of Research, SIAI > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first > overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson > > > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
