“Your interpretation that they weren’t concerned with painting an accurate picture hinges on Torres’ involvement being key information about the situation.” I think this is true.
Here’s why I think it’s a key piece of information, I’m curious where you disagree:
The post was meant to give us important information about the epistemics and character of various reviewers in EA.
If some reviewers reacted overly-negatively to a paper by Torres Kemp and Cremer, that’s less troubling than if reviewers reacted negatively to a paper by Kemp and Cremer. Because it’s much more understandable (even if wrong) to react overly-negatively to a paper that is by someone who has revealed bad intentions, slandered your colleagues, and repeatedly lied.
It also makes some of their questions make more sense, like asking the authors “Do you hate longtermism”?
I disagree on that—I think these behaviours and questions from reviewers are not any more reasonable with Torres involved.
However, seeing how lots of people here do care about that piece of information, I guess that does make it important, however inconsequential I personally think it should be.
“Your interpretation that they weren’t concerned with painting an accurate picture hinges on Torres’ involvement being key information about the situation.” I think this is true.
Here’s why I think it’s a key piece of information, I’m curious where you disagree:
The post was meant to give us important information about the epistemics and character of various reviewers in EA.
If some reviewers reacted overly-negatively to a paper by Torres Kemp and Cremer, that’s less troubling than if reviewers reacted negatively to a paper by Kemp and Cremer. Because it’s much more understandable (even if wrong) to react overly-negatively to a paper that is by someone who has revealed bad intentions, slandered your colleagues, and repeatedly lied.
It also makes some of their questions make more sense, like asking the authors “Do you hate longtermism”?
I disagree on that—I think these behaviours and questions from reviewers are not any more reasonable with Torres involved.
However, seeing how lots of people here do care about that piece of information, I guess that does make it important, however inconsequential I personally think it should be.