Given your expertise is in global health, I do think it’s likely that you’re less well-calibrated on how reasonable your animal welfare comments are relative to your global health ones! So you may think it’s a reasonable critique but someone who is a die-hard animal person may have already thought about your comment and know there is a common counterpoint that negates it (which you haven’t heard yet). Obviously, the inverse could be true for global health comments.
But I agree that this shouldn’t have been downvoted on karma grounds!
(Also, sometimes your comments do give me “I am sceptical of most things animal welfare” vibes, so people might be reacting to a real or perceived difference in values about how much animals matter).
“Also, sometimes your comments do give me “I am sceptical of most things animal welfare” vibes, so people might be reacting to a real or perceived difference in values about how much animals matter).”
i think this seems part of my point/the problem. i probably do have a difference in values? (maybe) about how much animals matter, but I would still be in the top 1 −5 percent of humans on the “caring about animals” front. If I’m giving you “skeptical of most things animal welfare vibes” then i think it might help to recalibrate to appreciate perspectives outside of an animal welfare bubble at it were.
Someone commenting at all in an animal welfare thread on the EA forum means they are likely to be extremely high on the “cares about animals” axis, unless they are trolling or downright abusive. Even someone who seems highly sceptical about animal welfare by your lights.
But even someone who doesn’t think animals matter at all should be able to make reasonable-ish comments without necessarily getting karma downvoted. The less echo chamber the better.
Given your expertise is in global health, I do think it’s likely that you’re less well-calibrated on how reasonable your animal welfare comments are relative to your global health ones! So you may think it’s a reasonable critique but someone who is a die-hard animal person may have already thought about your comment and know there is a common counterpoint that negates it (which you haven’t heard yet). Obviously, the inverse could be true for global health comments.
But I agree that this shouldn’t have been downvoted on karma grounds!
(Also, sometimes your comments do give me “I am sceptical of most things animal welfare” vibes, so people might be reacting to a real or perceived difference in values about how much animals matter).
“Also, sometimes your comments do give me “I am sceptical of most things animal welfare” vibes, so people might be reacting to a real or perceived difference in values about how much animals matter).”
i think this seems part of my point/the problem. i probably do have a difference in values? (maybe) about how much animals matter, but I would still be in the top 1 −5 percent of humans on the “caring about animals” front. If I’m giving you “skeptical of most things animal welfare vibes” then i think it might help to recalibrate to appreciate perspectives outside of an animal welfare bubble at it were.
Someone commenting at all in an animal welfare thread on the EA forum means they are likely to be extremely high on the “cares about animals” axis, unless they are trolling or downright abusive. Even someone who seems highly sceptical about animal welfare by your lights.
But even someone who doesn’t think animals matter at all should be able to make reasonable-ish comments without necessarily getting karma downvoted. The less echo chamber the better.