{"items": [{"author": "Alexandre", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122300071512", "anchor": "fb-10100122300071512", "service": "fb", "text": "If I might suggest, while \"received and read\" is hostile, \"Thanks. I appreciate your perspective.\" is usually a fine response.", "timestamp": "1574094739"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122300071512&reply_comment_id=10100122300635382", "anchor": "fb-10100122300071512_10100122300635382", "service": "fb", "text": "→ It still feels kind of hostile to me, or at least like I'm trying to shut them down? Especially if someone has clearly put a lot of work into the message.", "timestamp": "1574095243"}, {"author": "Alexandre", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122300071512&reply_comment_id=10100122302466712", "anchor": "fb-10100122300071512_10100122302466712", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff Kaufman I think it does make it clear that you don't intend to engage further and it doesn't feel great to receive. But I also think if I send a message to somebody, I should be willing to accept that this person might not want to engage. (Due to time constraints or any other reasons.)", "timestamp": "1574096592"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122300071512&reply_comment_id=10100122453234572", "anchor": "fb-10100122300071512_10100122453234572", "service": "fb", "text": "→ > I also think if I send a message to somebody, I should be willing to accept that this person might not want to engage.
I think this gets to the core of it: a message is implicitly a request for a response. Not responding presents an ambiguity: do they know I want a response and are denying that request, or did they not pick up on that?
If I\u2019m right, then a good response might be \u201cthanks, I\u2019ll mull that over.\u201d
This conveys \u201cyou have my attention and the respect that implies.\u201d But also \u201cI don\u2019t have a response completed to give you.\u201d And implicitly \u201cI might not ever have a formed response.\u201d", "timestamp": "1574154652"}, {"author": "Patrick", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122300655342", "anchor": "fb-10100122300655342", "service": "fb", "text": "I tend to message rather than comment if I expect that commenting would open a demon thread. (E.g. if I have a correction that could be rounded to toxoplasma by third parties.)", "timestamp": "1574095253"}, {"author": "Zera", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572", "service": "fb", "text": "Interesting.
If someone has negative feedback on something I've posted, I strongly prefer messages over comments, because of the risk Patrick mentioned and my feeling that negative comments/threads mar a post I've put thought into or otherwise care about for me and for future readers of the post.
I sometimes delete others' comments for this reason. If it seems the person put thought into the response, I make a copy of the comment so I can message it to them if they want it or want to continue discussion privately.", "timestamp": "1574096646"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122308963692", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122308963692", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I would never delete a comment just for being negative. I want readers to be correct to conclude \"all of the comments people thought to leave are positive\" from \"all of the comments on the post are positive\".", "timestamp": "1574099445"}, {"author": "Zera", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122309752112", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122309752112", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Makes sense. I think one factor that interplays with our differing approaches and sensibilities (kind of both upstream and downstream) is that you're writing for a public audience and my posts to Facebook are intended as an intentional, curated social interaction. (I expect if I had a public blog I would either delete comments much less often or would disable commenting entirely.)", "timestamp": "1574099782"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122310914782", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122310914782", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I'm curious what you mean by \"an intentional, curated social interaction\"; it sounds to me like this sort of approach is likely to lead to bad epistemics?", "timestamp": "1574100195"}, {"author": "Zera", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122313110382", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122313110382", "service": "fb", "text": "→ An analogy that seems relevant is how you curate who you invite over to your home for dinner or other social engagement. If someone starts fights with you or your other friends at your dinner (as contrasted with courteous intellectual disagreement), you might stop inviting them.
I think it would be odd for someone to say you should keep inviting them to dinner or else be led to bad epistemics. There are plenty of other ways to engage with alternative viewpoints.
To me, Facebook is more like my living room than it is a town hall or message board.", "timestamp": "1574101664"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122317586412", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122317586412", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I guess I feel like negative comments/threads are very different from starting fights? I wonder if maybe when you wrote \"negative comments\" above you have a different sort of comment in mind than I do?", "timestamp": "1574104059"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122318110362", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122318110362", "service": "fb", "text": "→ The kind of \"negative\" I'm imagining is threads like this one, https://www.lesswrong.com/.../experiments-and-consent... , that starts with gbear605's comment and then gets into a long back and forth between me and Said.", "timestamp": "1574104236"}, {"author": "Zera", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122347646172", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122347646172", "service": "fb", "text": "→ The reply you posted to gbear605 is not something I would see as negative and I wouldn't delete something like that.", "timestamp": "1574114616"}, {"author": "Zera", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122349287882", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122349287882", "service": "fb", "text": "→ A hypothetical example of the kind of negative I'm referring to is if I posted a new profile picture that I liked and someone commented \"ew\" or even just \"meh, your picture from two months ago was better, because [... reasons ...]\".
The second example sentence has reasons that one might discuss and discussing the claim might result in a better model of (presentation/style/attraction/photography), but which picture was better is not very important to the truth-seeking mission, and was not the point of posting the picture, and the person delivered their thought in a jerkish/insulting way, so I'd likely delete it rather than leave it there.", "timestamp": "1574115169"}, {"author": "Zera", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122349307842", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122349307842", "service": "fb", "text": "→ (I also have a recent real example but expect it might derail us on a tangent that I don't want to go on publically. Happy to send that actual example to specific friends or well-intentioned friends-of-jeffk-I-don't-know-yet in a message if requested though. \ud83d\ude43)", "timestamp": "1574115186"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122302536572&reply_comment_id=10100122453319402", "anchor": "fb-10100122302536572_10100122453319402", "service": "fb", "text": "→ @Zera it seems like the core distinction here is between \u201cdisagreeing\u201d and \u201crejecting\u201d", "timestamp": "1574154791"}, {"author": "Ari", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122309377862", "anchor": "fb-10100122309377862", "service": "fb", "text": "I\u2019m often very shy responding to world-visible posts. If a topic is even slightly controversial I don\u2019t want to talk about it in writing for all the world forever.", "timestamp": "1574099549"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122309377862&reply_comment_id=10100122310770072", "anchor": "fb-10100122309377862_10100122310770072", "service": "fb", "text": "→ I wonder how much of this is you having more trust in FB to keep things private? When I comment on a friends-only post I'm still only going to say things I'd be ok saying publicly.", "timestamp": "1574100075"}, {"author": "Ari", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122309377862&reply_comment_id=10100122311458692", "anchor": "fb-10100122309377862_10100122311458692", "service": "fb", "text": "→ Jeff Kaufman I\u2019m not worried about confidentiality in a strict sense. My experience is that two people who know each other often have good conversations, that large crowds of acquaintances do fine and that conversations with anybody in the world often become garbage fires.", "timestamp": "1574100547"}, {"author": "Hollis", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100122309377862&reply_comment_id=10100122312721162", "anchor": "fb-10100122309377862_10100122312721162", "service": "fb", "text": "→ For me, this is somewhat less about strict privacy and more about what Google shows other people who search my name.", "timestamp": "1574101331"}, {"author": "lsusr", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SJhsQfdJSxbJzaewq#e63BHx9c7FKAP5N2W", "anchor": "lw-e63BHx9c7FKAP5N2W", "service": "lw", "text": "That's too bad. Your experience differs from mine. However, I have only a 13th as many posts as you have, so it's possible this may change in the future.\n
Of the two private messages I've received both made total sense as private messages. One dealt with sensitive issues neither of us felt like stating publicly and the other corrected a minor miscalculation in one of my posts (which I immediately fixed).\n
With these exceptions aside, yes, I also prefer comments to my posts. One of my favorite reasons has to do with replying. Often commenter B will reply better to commenter A than I could have done myself. This is especially useful when several commenters produce various phenotypes of the same fundamental error.\n", "timestamp": 1574109878}, {"author": "bendini", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SJhsQfdJSxbJzaewq#h6mtA6BdiidHZ3mKE", "anchor": "lw-h6mtA6BdiidHZ3mKE", "service": "lw", "text": "→ I'd like to second this and say my experience has also been completely different.
There are some conversations that make sense to have 1v1, and most of the value I've gained from writing things has been when someone contacts me in private.
It does seem that while LessWrong doesn't actively discourage it, the site's UX makes it quite inconvenient to have those interactions.", "timestamp": 1574118560}, {"author": "Pattern", "source_link": "https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SJhsQfdJSxbJzaewq#TSymcpKMEZcQ3tqwa", "anchor": "lw-TSymcpKMEZcQ3tqwa", "service": "lw", "text": "I think the value of comments (and messages as well) may depend on the number.
Reading all the comments when there are twelve is feasible. Twelve hundred, not so much. There are valid reasons for non-public communication.
Also, this section was really well done, and does a good job of presenting a solution to problems around questions with potentially unpopular answers, like "I want to talk to as many people as I can who hold unusual positions so I can understand why".", "timestamp": 1574219747}, {"author": "Christopher", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/10100122296099472?comment_id=10100123115477432", "anchor": "fb-10100123115477432", "service": "fb", "text": "A one-on-one conversation is much easier to control and direct, and you have choice about conversation partners. When you have a public conversation, it is susceptible to hostile hijacking. I recall at college there were many conversations I could not have in public because of hostile hijacking (trolls, personal attacks, people taking offense, or even people with such a fundamentally different worldview that it would take hours to work through differences in core assumptions and get back to the main topic). That ultimately hampered or completely undermined the point of the conversation. That didn't stop me from engaging in public conversations, but it made me selective about what and when I went public with. That experience has largely held true in post-college environments as well.
Also, independently of my own preferences, some people I wanted to talk with were not comfortable talking more with me and with whomever jumped in, and so in order to talk to them I would have to engage in a private conversation.", "timestamp": "1574419257"}]}