The Stoner Arms Dealers [link via longform.org]
post by Kevin · 2011-03-21T09:57:21.910Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 6 commentshttp://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-stoner-arms-dealers-20110316?print=true
6 comments
Comments sorted by top scores.
comment by Paul Crowley (ciphergoth) · 2011-03-21T10:54:06.438Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Please don't link without saying something that makes it clear how the link is relevant to this site. Obviously in one sense everything relates to rationality, so it should go beyond "look, this is irrational!".
Replies from: Douglas_Knight, Kevin↑ comment by Douglas_Knight · 2011-03-21T16:58:43.917Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
it should go beyond "look, this is irrational!".
You have it backwards (which is evidence for your main point). The message I got was "look, this is rational!" This is hinted by the tag "entrepreneurship."
↑ comment by Kevin · 2011-03-21T12:16:12.070Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
No, I link things without saying clearly how it is relevant to the site. Please see my previous link history.
Clearly I thought it likely that at least some people might enjoy reading this story and that it was worth the slight risk of delving into extremely boring meta-conversation.
Replies from: ciphergoth↑ comment by Paul Crowley (ciphergoth) · 2011-03-21T12:39:01.339Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
I love this response. "No, I urinate on other people's rugs; see my previous urination history. Clearly I thought it worth the slight risk it might descend into boring conversation about who should urinate where."
Replies from: Kevincomment by Vladimir_Nesov · 2011-03-21T14:55:38.696Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Downvoted for not including a motivating summary (given that just the title doesn't give motivation for article's relevance). Would've downvoted even if the article turned out to be somewhat relevant after clicking the link (as a matter of policy), which in this case it didn't.