site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   Edited 1yr ago   5744 thread views

Quality Contributions Report for October 2022

Y'all must be trying to kill me. The sheer volume of quality contribution reports, combined with the outrageous volume of text you maniacs generate every week, made this an astonishing month to be sorting through the hopper. By far the busiest month for AAQCs since I took over the task. This made winnowing them down especially challenging, and some very good posts simply didn't make the cut simply because the competition was so fierce.

Good job, everyone.

This is the Quality Contributions Roundup. It showcases interesting and well-written comments and posts from the period covered. If you want to get an idea of what this community is about or how we want you to participate, look no further (except the rules maybe--those might be important too).

As a reminder, you can nominate Quality Contributions by hitting the report button and selecting the "Actually A Quality Contribution!" option. Additionally, links to all of the roundups can be found in the wiki of /r/theThread which can be found here. For a list of other great community content, see here.

These are mostly chronologically ordered, but I have in some cases tried to cluster comments by topic so if there is something you are looking for (or trying to avoid), this might be helpful. Here we go:

Quality Contributions in Culture Peace

@problem_redditor:

Contributions for the week of September 26, 2022

@PmMeClassicMemes:

@KulakRevolt:

Battle of the Sexes

@Tanista:

@problem_redditor:

@Ben___Garrison:

Contributions for the week of October 3, 2022

@Primaprimaprima:

@FiveHourMarathon:

@FCfromSSC:

@urquan:

Identity Politics

@Stefferi:

@urquan:

Contributions for the week of October 10, 2022

@urquan:

@Amadan:

@Chrisprattalpharaptor:

Battle of the Sexes

@VelveteenAmbush:

@sodiummuffin:

@JTarrou:

@bsbbtnh:

Identity Politics

@georgioz:

@gattsuru:

Contributions for the week of October 17, 2022

@MadMonzer:

@Minotaur:

@faceh:

@Butlerian:

@FCfromSSC:

@hydroacetylene:

@urquan:

@Eetan:

Identity Politics

@Hoffmeister25:

Contributions for the week of October 24, 2022

@urquan:

@johnfabian:

@LacklustreFriend:

@FCfromSSC:

@DaseindustriesLtd:

Battle of the Sexes

@cae_jones:

@SSCReader:

@Hoffmeister25:

Identity Politics

@FCfromSSC:

@Tanista:

16
Top Bottom New Old Controversial
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Welp, I give up.

What do you give up?

Trying to figure out what makes something an aaqc.

I swear pm had a post that I thought was really good last week or the week before (a meta post but I am completely blanking on any of the details - I just remember the tone was a bit off but the core message was great) and I nominated it but instead of that this drunk post made it in? I just can't pick them, so I am going to stop trying.

Yeah, @netstack has the right of it. The QCs are community driven, so the less you, personally, nominate, the less the QCs will reflect your judgment on what makes a QC. This month there were well over 200 nominations. The aim is to highlight about ten per week. Some of those nominations are always just people using QC as "I agree," and some appear to be trolling, but the great majority are genuinely good posts. And it used to be that anything with multiple nominations was a shoe-in, but this month had far more multi-nominated posts than ever before, too (possibly as a result of me mentioning that multiple-nominated posts tend to get approved first, which naturally changes everyone's nominating strategies...)

If I had to guess, I think what made the "drunk post" resonate was just that it was honest. It wasn't as self-effacing as FC's concession post, but it was in a similar vein on a different subject. Recognizing and articulating the weaknesses of our own positions is among the prime values that breathed life into this space.

Recognizing and articulating the weaknesses of our own positions is among the prime values that breathed life into this space.

That's what drew me to this place, I think it's a good way to be a better person. Anyway I am not really bothered, I just thought I'd figured it out (and I thought that other post was really good). I didn't mean to give the impression I thought something was wrong with the system.

I didn't mean to give the impression I thought something was wrong with the system.

Well, I mean--maybe there is! In particular, if regular users like yourself feel discouraged from making QC nominations in the first place, that's something I think we should be aware of and try to account for. So I appreciate the feedback! And hope that you will continue to nominate posts you regard as quality contributions.

Shrug. I wouldn't worry too hard over it.

Some people are here for aesthetics, some for core messages, and some for owning the [outgroup]. They're all going to nominate different stuff. Apparently this was a pretty busy month, too, so there's likely to be more stuff out on the fringes.

I believe the expression is "there's no accounting for taste."

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats