Third: The PS’ers have freedom of speech elsewhere, and are free to host their own conference and make their cases elsewhere. EA’s mission is (theoretically) to do the most good, not to host the most speech. They are not obligated to provide their facilities for the PS’ers or anybody else.
I think this is where your analogy runs into trouble. The issue EAs have with manifest is not that it’s an EA conference where people are being forced against their will to allow people to attend.
There is a non-EA conference that EAs are complaining about.
In terms of your analogy there is an event for people have quite weak noses and care about interesting new smells, let’s call it ManyZest (or MZ) for short. So some SNs (Sensitive Noses) attended MZ, smelled some PSs, hated the smell and are complaining about it on the forum.
Should MZ be shut down or penalised because of this? Noone has argued that PSs should be allowed at EAGs or that they should have an increased presence on this forum. Instead it’s about whether another event can invite them.
By your logic, that’s fine, right?
But in regard to manifest you say.
My argument is here is that we should ban virulent racists.
Oh, so your argument is actually that events outside of EA should ban attendees (how?) who other attendees think are racist. Yeah we disagree here. If manifest became overrun with people with some racist behaviour I would probably stop attending, but if attendees are polite and keep their hands to themselves I think they should generally be able to buy a ticket and attend events. Because for me this is a part of living in a liberal society. Finding someone’s beliefs gross is not enough for me to want to never associate with them. Doesn’t mean I want to go to a convention just for them, or have them to be a speaker at an event I attend, but I am okay with attending events where they attend. To me that’s up to the event organisers.
Someone is welcome to run “Manifest-but-without-any-guests-associated-with-genetics”. I’d probably attend that too. Maybe it would be more successful. I can even believe I would prefer it, because I don’t like the people we are discussing very much. But I would probably keep attending manifest too.
I think this is really 2 discussions put into 1:
Should your self-describe virulent racists be allowed to attend EAGs and should everyone stop downvoting them on this forum? Noone is arguing this, so it feels disingenuous that this piece seems to strawman the faction I am part of
Should your self-described virulent racists be allowed to attend and speak at non-EA events? I think yes to the first, no to the second, some people think yes to both. Here is where we actually disagree.
I’ll just point out that you say here Manifest is a non-EA conference, but here you say that “Manifest is not a rationalist event significantly more than it is an EA one”. I know the two claims are not fully contradictory, but it does seem like you are insinuating EAs should not be complaining about a non-EA event while telling Dustin that he shouldn’t blame the Hanania invite on rationality more than EA.
I think the responsibility for the Hanania invite (which I dislike fyi and put some effort into stopping) lies with Austin. Austin is a bit of an EA and a bit of a rat, but really he’s a hyper transparent Catholic[1]. His intuitions are different than basically anyone’s here. I like him and trust him to run events where he invites people I don’t like.
I thought about this and he really wouldn’t care about me saying it. He is the most transparent person I think I’ve ever met. If you told me that he made his emails public I wouldn’t be that surprised.
I think this is where your analogy runs into trouble. The issue EAs have with manifest is not that it’s an EA conference where people are being forced against their will to allow people to attend.
There is a non-EA conference that EAs are complaining about.
In terms of your analogy there is an event for people have quite weak noses and care about interesting new smells, let’s call it ManyZest (or MZ) for short. So some SNs (Sensitive Noses) attended MZ, smelled some PSs, hated the smell and are complaining about it on the forum.
Should MZ be shut down or penalised because of this? Noone has argued that PSs should be allowed at EAGs or that they should have an increased presence on this forum. Instead it’s about whether another event can invite them.
By your logic, that’s fine, right?
But in regard to manifest you say.
Oh, so your argument is actually that events outside of EA should ban attendees (how?) who other attendees think are racist. Yeah we disagree here. If manifest became overrun with people with some racist behaviour I would probably stop attending, but if attendees are polite and keep their hands to themselves I think they should generally be able to buy a ticket and attend events. Because for me this is a part of living in a liberal society. Finding someone’s beliefs gross is not enough for me to want to never associate with them. Doesn’t mean I want to go to a convention just for them, or have them to be a speaker at an event I attend, but I am okay with attending events where they attend. To me that’s up to the event organisers.
Someone is welcome to run “Manifest-but-without-any-guests-associated-with-genetics”. I’d probably attend that too. Maybe it would be more successful. I can even believe I would prefer it, because I don’t like the people we are discussing very much. But I would probably keep attending manifest too.
I think this is really 2 discussions put into 1:
Should your self-describe virulent racists be allowed to attend EAGs and should everyone stop downvoting them on this forum? Noone is arguing this, so it feels disingenuous that this piece seems to strawman the faction I am part of
Should your self-described virulent racists be allowed to attend and speak at non-EA events? I think yes to the first, no to the second, some people think yes to both. Here is where we actually disagree.
I’ll just point out that you say here Manifest is a non-EA conference, but here you say that “Manifest is not a rationalist event significantly more than it is an EA one”. I know the two claims are not fully contradictory, but it does seem like you are insinuating EAs should not be complaining about a non-EA event while telling Dustin that he shouldn’t blame the Hanania invite on rationality more than EA.
What’s the contradiction here?
I think the responsibility for the Hanania invite (which I dislike fyi and put some effort into stopping) lies with Austin. Austin is a bit of an EA and a bit of a rat, but really he’s a hyper transparent Catholic[1]. His intuitions are different than basically anyone’s here. I like him and trust him to run events where he invites people I don’t like.
I thought about this and he really wouldn’t care about me saying it. He is the most transparent person I think I’ve ever met. If you told me that he made his emails public I wouldn’t be that surprised.