PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 1:57 PM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: RE: [agi] META: do we need a stronger politeness code on this
list?
I think I have a better idea.
I believe the problem has to do with assumptions. If I have an AI system
that assumes an AGI can be made
Yes we do. The willingness of some members (especially Loosemore) to engage
in antisocial behavior is very counterproductive.
Stefan
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 11:47 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
2008/8/3 Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Also, can we limit the use of capitalization (aka shouting). There
may be rare circumstances under which this is necessary, but most of
the time it seems to be used gratuitously.
- Bob
-- 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: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] META: do we need a stronger
Richard,
I will not take time to statistically analyze your history of email posts.
My prior message, to which you take exception, represents my subjective
impression based on years of reading your posts. As a human being, I
frequently find reading your posts an unpleasant experience, not
PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
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
I used to think that critical attacks on a person's general thinking
were reasonable, but I have found that the best way to reduce the most
hostile and intolerant comments is to be overly objective and refrain
from making any personal comments at all. Unfortunately, I have found
that you have to
Vladimir Nesov wrote:
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
: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: August-03-08 11:25 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] META: do we need a stronger politeness code on
this list?
I think the sniper based moderation policy for SL4 works pretty well
and might be appropriate for this list. http://www.sl4
: Re: [agi] META: do we need a stronger politeness code on this list?
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 12:52 PM
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
-Original Message-
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: August-03-08 11:25 AM
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] META: do we need a stronger politeness code on
this list?
I think the sniper based moderation policy for SL4 works pretty well
and might
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [agi] META: do we need a stronger politeness code on this list?
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008, 12:52 PM
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
Charles Hixson wrote:
Vladimir Nesov wrote:
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
Ben
With my extensive training as a mediation counselor
let me suggest my own newly developed Mediation System Technology
as an aide to making such decisions concerning politeness...
(which also enjoys certain applications to a guaranteed friendly AGI)
This system is based upon a primary
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 would be very happy with some simple (and
I seriously meant it to be a friendly statement. Obviously I
expressed myself poorly.
Jim Bromer
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Brad Paulsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This from the guy who only about three or four days ago responded to a post
I made here by telling me to get a life. And, that
Jim Bromer,
This post is not intended for you specifically, but for the entire group. I
accept your apology. Peace. And now...
Everybody,
Gee, it seems like elitism and censorship are alive and well on the AGI list.
I can't believe some of the stuff I've read in this thread. Much of
I favor voluntary adoption of Crocker's Rules (explained at
http://www.sl4.org/crocker.html more at
http://www.google.com/search?q=crocker's+rules).
-dave
---
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed:
I'm relatively new here, as I've only been reading for a couple of
months, and I am hesitant to speak because the level of venom directed
at others seems to be very high.
I'd like it better if the hostility was toned down a lot.
My personal opinion is that if as much energy was devoted to
Ben Goertzel 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 ...).
I am sorry: I am not going to stand by and let you make accusations
without substantiating them.
Find evidence for
20 matches
Mail list logo
