It is a valuable informational service to accurately identify who fucked up. We used to call that “journalism.” It helps people decide whom they can trust and whom they can’t.
-
Show this thread
-
It is not valuable, but rather wishful thinking, to say “someone should do X” unless you are specifically advertising to the potential someones.
1 reply 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
This is a really good thing about
@robinhanson’s style of activism that more people should emulate: he makes actual, novel, positive proposals. “We could do this, and here’s why it would be better than the status quo.” Right or wrong, it contributes new information.2 replies 7 retweets 112 likesShow this thread -
A *serious* proposal, even if it’s a rough draft, is written to and for the people you’re trying to recruit to do the thing. It says “here’s something you might want to do.” It’s constructive in that sense.
2 replies 1 retweet 19 likesShow this thread -
If you’re writing about how the Establishment is bad, who are you writing to, and what are you teaching them or encouraging to do?
1 reply 4 retweets 26 likesShow this thread -
You could be doing the “journalism” thing I mentioned earlier — informing people that their leaders screwed up. That’s good.
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
Or you could be trying to change minds about a broader cultural attitude...which is what I’m constitutionally suspicious of.
3 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Telling people “you don’t think this yet but you Should” or “you won’t like this, but it’s true” is a dominance trick. It’s a neg. it plays on the fear of being criticized.
2 replies 0 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
“Only a [insert terrible name here] would disagree with me” is a rhetorical tactic for getting weak-minded people to passively go along with you. It’s not a way to attract competent people to actively buy in and help you.
1 reply 0 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
It’s kind of like — I find it skeevy to guilt-trip people into giving to charity. “You SHOULD be more generous.” The reality is, people are already pretty generous. You can provide donors *value* by offering them unusually good opportunities to help.
1 reply 1 retweet 16 likesShow this thread
“Put more effort/attention into MY favored project or I’ll withdraw my approval from you” is a song anyone can sing, and the loudest, nastiest voices are the best at it. I don’t think it’s a smart tactic for those whose causes are actually good.
-
-
Yes, I admit I’m sensitive about this personally. I think shaming people for not being good enough causes a lot of toxic side-effects. I know sometimes the right thing to do *is* to try harder, but there are ways to encourage effort that install less malware, I think.
1 reply 0 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
Good exhortatory content makes doing a hard thing look necessary, exciting, and *doable by you*. Skip the last part and you just demotivate people.
4 replies 0 retweets 22 likesShow this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.