Notes | Tutorial 46

Date: 2020-10-05

romance novels (X - 18min)

general comments

quality of conversation

how to have higher qual discussions with ppl other than ET
- ET:
  - conversation tree, review before replying, share with other person, consider what is a reply to what, esp important for self
  - short chunks
    - 2 at a time technique (ask a quest, answer one of theirs)
  - comments and aside stuff doesn’t need to go in tree
  - focus -> going in to depth -> focus on goal of getting something resolved
    - metric for conversation: resolutions (like OKRs / Key Outcomes)
- pre-empt hostility to discussion methodology with ‘rules’ esq post?
- people feel like they’re ‘done’ with learning about having discussions
- ppl want to ‘win’
  - setting bad victory conditions
  - student-teacher relationship vs peer-peer
MK: try conversation tree next time
- idea: is that how a forum could be structured
winning at fi
- no way to let them win
- feeling of winning /= actually winning?
asymmetry
- rationality symmetric – ‘impartial’ maybe better word
conversation ‘phases’
- early game: common ground, inferential difference
- mid game?
- end game?

ppl expect most conversations to fail; they’re looking for partial value to extract not proper outcomes.

people have a ‘queue’ of problems so they don’t like other errors being brought up

todo: https://www.elliottemple.com/essays/debates-and-impasse-chains

gavin alt options: 16705

You can leave a comment anonymously. No sign up or login is required. Use a junk email if not your own; email is only for notifications—though, FYI, I will be able to see it.