There’s currently a loud minority of EAs saying that EA should ostracize people if they associate with people who disagree with them.
people who disagree with them.
Oh, it's racists. The vague description is because it's racists. It's a woke cult now because some people don't want to associate with racists.
For a moment there I wanted to say, “ok hold on for a minute: you think EA doesn’t create cult-like behaviour, only woke creates cult-like behaviour, but even if I grant all that about woke, surely EVERY charitable enterprise in modern history has tended towards cult behaviour?”
“So what do you think makes EA so goddamn special?”
Then I realised it’s the “incredible epistemic norms” of EA, i.e. the strongest drivers of cult-like behaviour going almost worldwide at the moment, which are the primary bulwark against EA behaving like a cult
Can there be a rule about acronyms being defined on first usage? I spent way to long trying to figure out how Electronic Arts had some cult infestation in their upper management and how “wokeism” applied, especially since stuff like that has been in the game developer news cycle again. I started getting really confused when I saw some linked post conversation talking about some founder and their polyamorous relationship.
I’ve figured out that we’re talking about effective altruism, but at this point I’ve wasted my entire pre-bed shit time on people I couldn’t care less about.
Unfortunately in this case the problem is you (as a non-frequenter of this sub (which is explicitly about dunking on these fools)) coming in with no context, although I’d agree with you in principle otherwise
Also it sounds like that game-EA thing could do with a sneer on techtakes
Also it sounds like that game-EA thing could do with a sneer on techtakes
Careful with that one, it might bring out the people who want to redo 2015, but worse.
Honestly bonkers to hear “woke” used unironically
and with its original meaning! i.e., awareness of systemic racism
also, isn't that the “nonlinear” thing co-founder?
Which, to recap for everyone, involved underpaying and manipulating employees into working as full time general purpose servants. Which is pretty up there on the scale of cult-like activity out of everything EA has done. So it makes sense she would be trying to pull a switcheroo as to who is responsible for EA being culty...
That's actually a very common feature of cults, including a lot of the ones considered less extreme.
full time general purpose servant
and fucktoys on the side, this is EA after all
Do you really think "cult" is a useful category/descriptor here?
My view: things identified as "cults" have a bunch of good traits. EA should, where possible, adopt the good traits and reject the bad ones, and ignore whether they're associated with the label "cult" or not.
Nobody:
EA: Scientology has some good traits, we should copy them.
The People Who Pray At Prompts are suddenly very worried about cults.
E: haha spoke too soon
from the replies:
Do you really think "cult" is a useful category/descriptor here?
My view: things identified as "cults" have a bunch of good traits. EA should, where possible, adopt the good traits and reject the bad ones, and ignore whether they're associated with the label "cult" or not.
Wonder what went wrong there, did they just see the word EA and Cult and went 'people are calling Rationalism a cult again, time to deploy the Rationalist answer. A bot? Something else? (More edit, ah prob somethign else as this is prob a reaction to the whole line of tweets and not that specific tweet, a line of tweets which are doing the geek social fallacies there is a little bit more to being a cult than just ostracizing people)
I've been appreciating the term "high-control group" as an alternative, with reference to the BITE [1] model of thought control. People trapped in the group housing situation easily check all of those boxes.
[1] https://freedomofmind.com/cult-mind-control/bite-model-pdf-download/ (note: Steven Hassan has done good work, but can be a little too profit-seeking himself imho)
I've thought about this angle a lot too. As an apostate Christian and practicing Pastafarian, I keenly feel the difference between high-control and low-control religious groups, and the control bothers me much more than the religiosity. BITE is still my gold standard to this day for understanding whether somebody is being coerced/controlled.
Also, if you think cultists get pissed at their beliefs being called a "cult", watch how much more they flip out at being called a "high-control group". It's a very good disarming technique.
what the heck EA forum doesn't have a block feature? That's just... ew.
Also how long have all these people been obsessed with "woke" and "the left"? Because it's been really obvious and over the top lately.
Because they’re the wealthy or at least believe in wealth’s ability to do good. A basic interpretation of EA would say that you should start a company, and maximize profit even at the expense of worker compensation so you have more to give to charity
They approximate by forming private companies that they then talk about as if they're 501(c)3 charities and pay accordingly, or less - see our friends such as Kat Woods at Nonlinear here for a previous worked example.
what the heck EA forum doesn’t have a block feature? That’s just… ew.
You don't need a block feature if you're as insufferable as the average EA /j
these people can't stop telling on themselves lmao
There’s currently a loud minority of EAs saying that EA should ostracize people if they associate with people who disagree with them. That we should try to protect EAs from ideas that are not held by the majority of EAs.
how fucking far are their heads up their own collective arses to not understand that you can't have a productive, healthy discourse without drawing a line in the sand?
they spend fucking hundreds of collective hours going around in circles on the EA forum debating^[where "debating" here is continually claiming to be "'open to criticism" while, at the same time, trashing anyone who does provide any form of legitimate criticism, so much so that it seems to be a "norm" for internal criticism to be anonymous for fear of retribution] this shit, instead of actually doing anything useful
how do they, in good conscience, deny any responsibility for the real harms ideas cause, when they continue to lend them legitimacy by entertaining them over and over and over again?
I swear these fuckers have never actually had to fight for or defend something that is actually important, or directly affects the day-to-day lived experience or material conditions of themselves or anyone they care about
I hope we protect EA’s incredible epistemic norms
lol, the norms that make it a-okay to spew batshit stuff like this? fuck off
Also, it’s obvious that this isn’t actually EA cultiness really, but just woke ideology trying to take over EA
how fucking far are their heads up their own collective arses to not understand that you can’t have a productive, healthy discourse without drawing a line in the sand?
they spend fucking hundreds of collective hours going around in circles on the EA forum debating[1] this shit, instead of actually doing anything useful
They discovered scope creep but for racism and made it into a religious obligation.
they spend fucking hundreds of collective hours going around in circles on the EA forum debating[1] this shit, instead of actually doing anything useful
how do they, in good conscience, deny any responsibility for the real harms ideas cause, when they continue to lend them legitimacy by entertaining them over and over and over again?
Adderall
This post is the worst Burma Shave roadside ad ever.
