#celineslaws — Public Fediverse posts

@adriano In which case my "No" is all the more emphatic.

UX is purpose.

Make blocking apparent. Make it highly discoverable. Suggest blocking where it seems that there's a possibly heated or nonproductive engagement emerging. (Or other alternatives such as muting.) Provide an interface to review blocks/mutes, and potentially reverse them. (Something I do occasionally, but virtually always end up re-instating myself.)

But do NOT change the incentives or rewards to blocking / muting beyond the direct and personal mental hygiene of the party enacting it.

In any informational environment, rewarding anything other than direct truth or utility turns out to be tremendously distortionary. That's an expansion of Celine's Second Law: "Accurate communication is possible only in a non-punishing situation." (Robert Anton Wilson.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine%27s_laws

If you punish inconvenient truths or reward appealing lies, you're going to end up with a highly distorted epistemic landscape. Facebook, Twitter, and much else on social media should be an entirely sufficient argument against gamification of such feedbacks

Be careful what you incentivise. You will get it.

@pluralistic @Daojoan

#CelinesLaws #RobertAntonWilson #Incentives #Truth #Epistemology #Philosophy