Hide table of contents

I wonder whether I should write more comments pointing out what I liked in a post even if I don't have anything to criticise instead of just silently upvoting.

- Denise Melchin

I've heard this question quite a few times, and the answer is: Yes! Absolutely yes! Tell authors when you like something they've written!

Imaginary case study

Consider the experience of a Forum author who writes a post most readers like, in a world where people only comment if they have a critique. 

They go to the Forum and see a string of comments:

  • "You're wrong about A."
  • "You're wrong about B."
  • "Why didn't you mention C?"

The post could have dozens of upvotes, but if it looks like anyone who closely engaged with it found something to criticize, the author may not feel great about their work. 

(This doesn't mean that criticism isn't valuable: If you find something to criticize, you should also probably tell the author.)

In a world where people share what they like about posts, the comments might be:

  • "You're wrong about A."
    • "I see what the above poster means about point A1, but I thought point A2 was actually an interesting take, and could be correct under assumption Q."
  • "I hadn't read this post you linked to — thanks for the reference!"
  • "You're wrong about B."
  • "I really liked your discussion of B!"
  • "Why didn't you mention C?"
  • "Your points about D and E were really helpful for a project I'm working on."

The criticism still exists, but I'd expect the author to feel better about responding if they know the post was valuable to some readers.

Also, positive reactions are useful feedback in their own right!

Frequently asked questions

What if my positive comment is just "thanks, I enjoyed this?" 

Still good! Even a generic nice comment will be much more salient to most authors than a silent upvote.

What if my positive comment just takes up space in a way that distracts from more important critical discussion and intellectual progress and whatnot?

This is paraphrased from things I've actually heard when talking to Forum users. 

While I understand the concern, I must emphasize that the Forum exists on the Internet, a system of interconnected computer networks where space is effectively unlimited. We also offer the "scrollbar," a feature people can use to skip over comments they don't want to read or discuss. 

If someone finds your positive comment distracting, they can scroll past it. But there's at least one person who probably won't find it distracting — the author.

Conclusion

If you like a post, tell the author!

If you don't like a post, it's also fine to tell the author!

But at the very least, let's try to make sure authors don't get a negatively-skewed view of how people think about their posts.

Comments19


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

I am supportive of this. May I also suggest that there's more than one way to tell the author?

  • I have occasionally received a comment at the bottom of the post, saying something like "I liked this post", or "this was really interesting, thank you!". I have liked these comments.
  • Occasionally, people have taken the effort send a message via the EA Forum's messaging mechanism to tell me how much they like a post. This has been really lovely.

Thank you for this post! I appreciate these kind of posts with suggestions about how to use the forum.

On the specific point, I appreciate the positivity of people posting that they like a particular article, and feel it makes it seem more appealing to write articles. Also, I often find it a bit tough to tell when I write something whether people find it useful, what they find it useful for, and what parts seem particularly useful. So I really appreciate people who find posts useful not just upvoting (which might just be a sign they found it a pleasant read), but actually commenting with some more information.

This is my favorite part:"While I understand the concern, I must emphasize that the Forum exists on the Internet, a system of interconnected computer networks where space is effectively unlimited."

I think this is in fact a very useful reminder. And it made me laugh, and read it again and laugh again. Thank you :)

(I like this post.)

I like this comment

This this this! As a PhD student in economics, I'm always pushing for the same thing in academia. People usually think saying nice job is useless, because it doesn't help people improve. It's important for people to know what they're doing right, though. It's also important for people to get positive reinforcement to keep going down a path, so if you want someone to keep persevering (which I hope we generally do), it's good to give them a boost when they do a good job.

Yeah exactly, that's how facebook/twitter/reddit works, positive feedback

In accordance with the post: I thought this was useful. As an old time forum hack I often have people say they feel too scared to post here because all you seem to get is people trying to destroy your ideas. It shouldn't be the case that the only people brave enough to post here are those types who score low in agreeableness (such as yours truly).

Also on this, how to we get engagement from people who are not in general well read? (Such as me truly)

I like this post. I think I'll try and do this much more often here as an experiment. 

I mean, I'm active in many places online... as a lurker. But if I'm going to practice spreading positive good this is probably a great place to practice. 

Thank you for writing this, Aaron. I'd be much more excited about participating in a forum with this cultural norm :) <3

As an author, this is SO TRUE.

Honestly the "people only comment to criticize" pattern incentivizes authors to be edgy to get any feedback on their ideas at all.

This post is great!

This is a good suggestion, one I'll keep in mind as I read posts that I find valuable. As someone who appreciates how hard it is to write a complex essay, I can say that it's encouraging to see positive responses alongside critiques. Positive responses register more clearly than an upvote and often include useful information as well.

(It's easier when you're told to do it directly, but I figure if I don't do it now, I probably won't later, and I'd like to start doing this, so...)

I really like this post! I also like to remember that complainy people are more likely to leave reviews, when I'm reading reviews for a product or something. Helps me take the negative ones with a grain of salt.

I like the general idea here, but personally I dislike comments that don't tell the the reader new information, so just saying the equivalent of "yay" without adding something is likely to get a downvote from me if the comment is upvoted, especially if it gets upvoted above more substantial comments.

I think one or two positive posts are fine. I'd agree if every post were like that. But that's true of all post types.

I guess I think there is new information to the author which is, "someone like my post enough to specifically say so". You could argue that's included in the post karma, but emotionally, I don't think they are the same.

hey, thanks for this post! I find it quite nice.

Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
Rory Fenton
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
Cross-posted from my blog. Contrary to my carefully crafted brand as a weak nerd, I go to a local CrossFit gym a few times a week. Every year, the gym raises funds for a scholarship for teens from lower-income families to attend their summer camp program. I don’t know how many Crossfit-interested low-income teens there are in my small town, but I’ll guess there are perhaps 2 of them who would benefit from the scholarship. After all, CrossFit is pretty niche, and the town is small. Helping youngsters get swole in the Pacific Northwest is not exactly as cost-effective as preventing malaria in Malawi. But I notice I feel drawn to supporting the scholarship anyway. Every time it pops in my head I think, “My money could fully solve this problem”. The camp only costs a few hundred dollars per kid and if there are just 2 kids who need support, I could give $500 and there would no longer be teenagers in my town who want to go to a CrossFit summer camp but can’t. Thanks to me, the hero, this problem would be entirely solved. 100%. That is not how most nonprofit work feels to me. You are only ever making small dents in important problems I want to work on big problems. Global poverty. Malaria. Everyone not suddenly dying. But if I’m honest, what I really want is to solve those problems. Me, personally, solve them. This is a continued source of frustration and sadness because I absolutely cannot solve those problems. Consider what else my $500 CrossFit scholarship might do: * I want to save lives, and USAID suddenly stops giving $7 billion a year to PEPFAR. So I give $500 to the Rapid Response Fund. My donation solves 0.000001% of the problem and I feel like I have failed. * I want to solve climate change, and getting to net zero will require stopping or removing emissions of 1,500 billion tons of carbon dioxide. I give $500 to a policy nonprofit that reduces emissions, in expectation, by 50 tons. My donation solves 0.000000003% of the problem and I feel like I have f
LewisBollard
 ·  · 8m read
 · 
> How the dismal science can help us end the dismal treatment of farm animals By Martin Gould ---------------------------------------- Note: This post was crossposted from the Open Philanthropy Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. ---------------------------------------- This year we’ll be sharing a few notes from my colleagues on their areas of expertise. The first is from Martin. I’ll be back next month. - Lewis In 2024, Denmark announced plans to introduce the world’s first carbon tax on cow, sheep, and pig farming. Climate advocates celebrated, but animal advocates should be much more cautious. When Denmark’s Aarhus municipality tested a similar tax in 2022, beef purchases dropped by 40% while demand for chicken and pork increased. Beef is the most emissions-intensive meat, so carbon taxes hit it hardest — and Denmark’s policies don’t even cover chicken or fish. When the price of beef rises, consumers mostly shift to other meats like chicken. And replacing beef with chicken means more animals suffer in worse conditions — about 190 chickens are needed to match the meat from one cow, and chickens are raised in much worse conditions. It may be possible to design carbon taxes which avoid this outcome; a recent paper argues that a broad carbon tax would reduce all meat production (although it omits impacts on egg or dairy production). But with cows ten times more emissions-intensive than chicken per kilogram of meat, other governments may follow Denmark’s lead — focusing taxes on the highest emitters while ignoring the welfare implications. Beef is easily the most emissions-intensive meat, but also requires the fewest animals for a given amount. The graph shows climate emissions per tonne of meat on the right-hand side, and the number of animals needed to produce a kilogram of meat on the left. The fish “lives lost” number varies significantly by
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism