There have been so many posts on this already—and, oh, here’s another one—seeing the Apology part makes up most of the post. Here’s an opinion from outside: the Apology is not anywhere close to being this serious of an issue it is presented. I’ll say more: many people would even argue the original post Bostrom issued the apology for wasn’t particularly bad. Because many people worldwide may well hold views that here are seen as abhorrent. I’m not sure this holier than thou attitude on the forum is all that beneficial.
If you set aside the apology part of the post, and just focus on e.g. the fact that FHI has lost many of their staff and has been unable to hire for two years, how do you feel about Nick as director considering only those facts?
There have been so many posts on this already—and, oh, here’s another one—seeing the Apology part makes up most of the post. Here’s an opinion from outside: the Apology is not anywhere close to being this serious of an issue it is presented. I’ll say more: many people would even argue the original post Bostrom issued the apology for wasn’t particularly bad. Because many people worldwide may well hold views that here are seen as abhorrent. I’m not sure this holier than thou attitude on the forum is all that beneficial.
If you set aside the apology part of the post, and just focus on e.g. the fact that FHI has lost many of their staff and has been unable to hire for two years, how do you feel about Nick as director considering only those facts?
I honestly don’t feel I’m anywhere near competent to evaluate how good anyone is as a director of some institute.
I strongly disagree with you but yeah I really don’t think we need to re-litigate the apology. There are lots of other threads for that.