Harry -- Thanks a lot, I really appreciate your message. It is good to get contributions on these META themes from individuals who are *not* among the 5-10% of list members who frequently post.
If any other lurkers or semi-lurkers have opinions on these META issues, I and others would be interested to hear from you... Ben G On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Harry Chesley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have never posted to the list before for exactly the reasons under > discussion. It seems to me that the list is dominated, in terms of volume, > not, I think, in terms of people, by two types of posts: 1) You don't > understand theory x, which explains why your idea or approach is unworkable; > you need to spend hours (perhaps days) reading about that (my) theory. Or 2) > You're an idiot and your ideas are trash. > > I am pursuing a line of research that I believe has potential. It would be > useful to have a place I could float ideas and get some feedback. While I'm > not particularly thin skinned, I don't have the time to deal with excursions > into entirely different theories or to deal with the distractive emotional > baggage that's so common here. I would also be happy to provide feedback to > posts by others, but I don't want to get dragged into heated and often > content-sparse threads of discussion. > > I have seen very good and productive threads on this list, but they tend to > be the exception. Hence I mostly just delete the items from the list, and > follow the occasional thread that looks interesting or involves people who > have posted more reasonable items in the past. As with most lists, 90% of > the content is generated by 10% of the members. In this case, that involves > much unnecessary distraction and unpleasantness. > > Giving posters "time out"s for personal attacks might go a long way toward > calming the list down and encouraging some of the people like me to become > more involved. Also, a list FAQ that includes pointers to some of the > theories that get repeated endlessly, together with encouragement to the > posters to just post the FAQ's URL rather than repeating the entire theory, > might reduce the repetition. (Wasn't there a wiki area exactly for that > started a while ago?) > > Anyway, that's my two cents. > > On 8/3/2008 6:13 AM, Ben Goertzel 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] <mailto: >> [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] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> >> >> To: <[email protected] <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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/?&; >> <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/?&; >> <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] <mailto:[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> < >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | Modify < >> https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription [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 ------------------------------------------- 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
