In my view, the comment isn’t particularly responsive to the post. I take the post’s main critique as being something like: groups present themselves as devoted to EA as a question and to helping participants find their own path in EA, but in practice steer participants heavily toward certain approved conclusions.
That critique is not inconsistent with “EA resources should be focused on AI and longtermism,” or maybe even “EA funding for university groups should concentrate on x-risk/AI groups that don’t present themselves to be full-spectrum EA groups.”
In my view, the comment isn’t particularly responsive to the post.
Shouldn’t we expect people who believe that a comment isn’t responsive to its parent post to downvote it rather than to disagree-vote it, if they don’t have any substantive disagreements with it?
In my view, the comment isn’t particularly responsive to the post. I take the post’s main critique as being something like: groups present themselves as devoted to EA as a question and to helping participants find their own path in EA, but in practice steer participants heavily toward certain approved conclusions.
That critique is not inconsistent with “EA resources should be focused on AI and longtermism,” or maybe even “EA funding for university groups should concentrate on x-risk/AI groups that don’t present themselves to be full-spectrum EA groups.”
Shouldn’t we expect people who believe that a comment isn’t responsive to its parent post to downvote it rather than to disagree-vote it, if they don’t have any substantive disagreements with it?