General Methods of Rationality Discussion/Complaint Thread

[Terrabrand]

Okay, let's start over. My issue is not the necroposting, I could care less about that. This whole thing started because I made the following comment:

Which is basically because that is what he did in two separate double posts, telling people who are no longer having the conversation, to take said conversation to a thread which has not been active for just as long. Hence me telling him how about no.

I will admit that it is amusing that more people have spent time complaining about me saying "How about no" then have actually been used for stuff that is on topic.

Click to shrink...

... You realize this is exactly why such complaining is considered disruptive, yes? Because you posting has now led to a chain of off topic posts, having contributed nothing itself?

Like, it's not on everyone else that you did something pretty much guaranteed to disrupt the thread, especially when you have *counts* 5/11 of the off topic posts in this chain, counting my prior posts where I attempted to at least elucidate what the rules actually say.

You began and have continued a thread disruption. Usually, when I see the necroposting complaint problem, the issue is a bunch of contentless dogpiling on the 'necroposting'. In this case, it all comes from you posting with a maximum of two responses to you before you posted again. You have nearly half the off topic posts.

As to the idea that it was over: People shut up because they were asked to not be off-topic. The conversation was by no means resolved, and had in fact started up again having 'stopped' because it was called out as off topic.

There is clearly plenty of willingness to discuss this. Too much, even.

 

[mothematics]

Yudkowsky's weird; his non-fiction writings are strange, banal and mutated, like an animal born with a deformed limb that never got properly set. I hold him in about the same regard I do Time Cube, but I think his closest point of comparison is probably Jordan Peterson, or L. Ron Hubbard. He's a hack who claims to be an expert in a field he contributes almost nothing to and what little he does is basically worthless. This article puts it very well:

If you want to appear very profound and convince people to take you seriously, but have nothing of value to say, there is a tried and tested method. First, take some extremely obvious platitude or truism. Make sure it actually does contain some insight, though it can be rather vague. Something like "if you're too conciliatory, you will sometimes get taken advantage of" or "many moral values are similar across human societies." Then, try to restate your platitude using as many words as possible, as unintelligibly as possible, while never repeating yourself exactly. Use highly technical language drawn from many different academic disciplines, so that no one person will ever have adequate training to fully evaluate your work. Construct elaborate theories with many parts. Draw diagrams. Use italics liberally to indicate that you are using words in a highly specific and idiosyncratic sense. Never say anything too specific, and if you do, qualify it heavily so that you can always insist you meant the opposite. Then evangelize: speak as confidently as possible, as if you are sharing God's own truth. Accept no criticisms: insist that any skeptic has either misinterpreted you or has actually already admitted that you are correct. Talk as much as possible and listen as little as possible. Follow these steps, and your success will be assured. (It does help if you are male and Caucasian.)
Jordan Peterson appears very profound and has convinced many people to take him seriously. Yet he has almost nothing of value to say. This should be obvious to anyone who has spent even a few moments critically examining his writings and speeches, which are comically befuddled, pompous, and ignorant. They are half nonsense, half banality. In a reasonable world, Peterson would be seen as the kind of tedious crackpot that one hopes not to get seated next to on a train.

Click to shrink...

While this applies to a depressing amount of academic writing, it's applicable to Yudkowsky (though I would scarcely call him academic) as well here. He's a nothing.

My impression of HPMOR, having read a chapter or two years ago, is that it is much like its writer: very smart, entirely enamored of its own intelligence, and equally bizarre and tragic in how its egotistic self-confidence rejects any possibility of unlearning all the dumb shit already internalized. It feels like he read Ender's Game and came away with the idea that Ender was someone to be emulated, and tried to basically write it again but as Harry Potter fanfiction. The problem being this new story was being written by someone without an iota of the talent of Orson Scott Card (even if Card is an awful, transparent homophobe).

I'm glad I know about the dude, because the story behind Roko's basilisk and how it detonated his little cult over at LessWrong is one of the more delicious internet stories of absolute batshit social groups intersecting with nonsense, autism and mental illness. It's up there with the Philmarilion and Bath-kun and the endless stories of @Cetashwayo trying to Just Do Some Fucking Half Life 2 RP On GMod, Fuck Off Already, and some of the more weird outliers we've had on SV.

But I don't think I'll be reading the story any time soon. I remember finding parts of it really funny, years ago, but after all the snippets of it I've seen, it just doesn't look like something that's worth the work, much less something I would personally find enjoyable.

 

[Terrabrand]

My impression of HPMOR, having read a chapter or two years ago, is that it is much like its writer: very smart, entirely enamored of its own intelligence, and equally bizarre and tragic in how its egotistic self-confidence rejects any possibility of unlearning all the dumb shit already internalized.

Click to shrink...

I'd say that's about accurate, from having read, oh, probably at least sixty chapters from an initially more positive opinion of it. In retrospect, I've realized the thing was full of self indulgent references to what I assume is whatever series and settings Yudowsky liked, without regard for respecting those same materials nor for whether it makes sense in universe for the characters to be making these references.

A friend recently pointed out we are initially told Harry grew up in a house with no fiction books, or something along those lines. So, why does Harry make so many Warhammer 40K references? He's an eleven year old who was supposedly kept away from fiction. Why does he know the bloody and grimdark setting of 40K?

Or are things like declaring himself a 'Grey Knight of Chaos'( ) supposed to be complete coincidence?

By the way, this is Britain. You know, where Games Workshop is. Why do none of these characters, even eg muggleborns, recognize his 40K references? Even tangentially?

 

[Leila Hann]

But I don't think I'll be reading the story any time soon. I remember finding parts of it really funny, years ago, but after all the snippets of it I've seen, it just doesn't look like something that's worth the work, much less something I would personally find enjoyable.

Click to shrink...

I still maintain that chapter 13 is excellent if read in isolation. It also doesn't require any outside knowledge of the rest of the story.

 

[Dorsey]

Okay, let's start over. My issue is not the necroposting, I could care less about that. This whole thing started because I made the following comment:

Which is basically because that is what he did in two separate double posts, telling people who are no longer having the conversation, to take said conversation to a thread which has not been active for just as long. Hence me telling him how about no.

I will admit that it is amusing that more people have spent time complaining about me saying "How about no" then have actually been used for stuff that is on topic.

Click to shrink...

A few hours ago MrCogmor told a bunch of people in the RWBY Lets Watch thread to move their discussion of HPatMoR to the HPatMoR discussion thread. MrCogmor did not reply to any of the posts in this thread. The post they did respond to were talking quite heatedly about it at the time.

I hope that clears up the confusion.

 

[divabot]

My main issue with this fic other than being propaganda for LessWrong and his cult, is that Harry is not Harry at all. LW should have just made an OC.

Click to shrink...

Not just an OC, but a self-insert. And not just one self-insert, but two self-inserts. The majority of the story is the character interaction between his two self-inserts.

(Science happens two or three times total, and not at all after ch 25? 26? "Harry Potter and the Scientific Method" it most assuredly is not.)

I'm glad I know about the dude, because the story behind Roko's basilisk and how it detonated his little cult over at LessWrong is one of the more delicious internet stories of absolute batshit social groups intersecting with nonsense, autism and mental illness. It's up there with the Philmarilion and Bath-kun and the endless stories of @Cetashwayo trying to Just Do Some Fucking Half Life 2 RP On GMod, Fuck Off Already, and some of the more weird outliers we've had on SV.

Click to shrink...

The subculture is alive and well, mostly based around Berkeley, the revived lesswrong.com (software rewritten to work) and Reddit /r/slatestarcodex. Here's the regular annual Why Our Subculture Sucks post for 2017 (very long). Also, the Dragon Army house: an actual rationalist cult compound that amazingly didn't turn into Jonestown in Berkeley.

Also, Vitalik Buterin of the Ethereum cryptocurrency project is the big backer now, having donated just over 30% of MIRI's 2017 fundraiser personally.

Also, /r/slatestarcodex has gone full scientific racist. Like, really really. It seems to be a big part of the LW thing in 2018.

I tripped over Roko's Facebook - he of the Basilisk - the other month. (no, no link.) It's a mix of transhumanism, men's rights activist memes and scientific racism.

I heartily recommend The Basilisk Murders by Andrew Hickey. Here's the bit about the bitcoiner.

But I don't think I'll be reading the story any time soon. I remember finding parts of it really funny, years ago, but after all the snippets of it I've seen, it just doesn't look like something that's worth the work, much less something I would personally find enjoyable.

Click to shrink...

This is a correct decision.

That said, following my completely chance success with an unexpected hit book about bitcoin (see sig), I keep saying the next one will be called Roko's Basilisk and be about our friends. The main thing putting me off is that I don't really want to talk to any of them. Tom Chivers' book will probably come out first.

 

[Aris Katsaris]

A friend recently pointed out we are initially told Harry grew up in a house with no fiction books, or something along those lines.

Click to shrink...

LOL, what? The very first paragraph of the story, says how many science fiction books there are in Harry's house.

"Other shelves have two layers of paperback science fiction, with the back layer of books propped up on old tissue boxes or lengths of wood, so that you can see the back layer of books above the books in front. And it still isn't enough. Books are overflowing onto the tables and the sofas and making little heaps under the windows."

 

[Aris Katsaris]

My main issue with this fic other than being propaganda for LessWrong and his cult, is that Harry is not Harry at all

Click to shrink...

Indeed. He's Tom Riddle, as eventually revealed, and has near nothing of the original Harry Potter left, as again eventually acknowledged in story. And it seems EY was very good at doing fitting characterization for Tom Riddle, because in a Let's Read Thread, the snarky reader said after a few chapter "I thought I was reading a biography of Tom Riddle", not realizing this actually was praise of the story's characterization.

 

[Aris Katsaris]

opposes Harry... By buying fully into his bizarre and unusual worldview

Click to shrink...

So basically damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. There's no plausible course of action whatsoever that Hermione could have taken that would have left you satisfied. If she is better at him in classes, this is bad, because it compares her to him. If she opposes him ethically as she does and attacks his decision and judgment, as she does, this is bad because it's "buying fully into his bizarre worldview". If she forces him to take his transfiguration experiments to McGonaggal and Dumbledore for prudence's sake, and Harry acknowledges and apologizes to her for being right all along, that's bad because of... whatever.

 

[Terrabrand]

So basically damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. There's no plausible course of action whatsoever that Hermione could have taken that would have left you satisfied. If she is better at him in classes, this is bad, because it compares her to him. If she opposes him ethically as she does and attacks his decision and judgment, as she does, this is bad because it's "buying fully into his bizarre worldview". If she forces him to take his transfiguration experiments to McGonaggal and Dumbledore for prudence's sake, and Harry acknowledges and apologizes to her for being right all along, that's bad because of... whatever.

Click to shrink...

Or, Hermione could get a chapter devoted to, I dunno, a love of chess, that simply has nothing to with Harry.

When a female character's entire everything always comes back to a single specific male character, this is suspect.

 

[Leila Hann]

You know you can quote multiple users in the same post, right?

 

[Aris Katsaris]

Or, Hermione could get a chapter devoted to, I dunno, a love of chess, that simply has nothing to with Harry.

Click to shrink...

And you wouldn't bash such a chapter as misogynistic for showing her interested in some minor pursuit that doesn't affect the story or the world, while Harry is off doing important stuff (tm)?

A chapter of Hermione with a hobby of stamp-collecting, okay, that's what was needed to combat the allegations of sexism, not Hermione caring about politics or science or ethics or being good at classes, because that's stuff that Harry also cared about.

 

[Terrabrand]

And you wouldn't bash such a chapter as misogynistic for showing her interested in some minor pursuit that doesn't affect the story or the world, while Harry is off doing important stuff (tm)?

Click to shrink...

... Dude. This is such an ugly question.

• The story 'wasting' a chapter is something it did repeatedly, in the sense of showing stuff not 'important', eg the whole war games thing were several individual chapters were committed to things of no grand import.
• Trying to 'gotcha' me by asserting the default assumption is that I would 'bash' the chapter as misogynistic is just plain uncivil. Which is exactly what the structure of your question does.
• Harry is not the center of the universe. Hermione could, alternatively, successfully do Important Things herself, without any direct connection to Harry.
• My particular example of a love of chess could be used to set up later plot points- look at canon, where Ron's chess skills for the mirror are set up by his love of chess. This love of chess has no connection to Harry, but is later important, to Harry.
• There is no reason why Harry would have to be off doing important things. Large portions of the school year were time skipped over. Ergo your little verbal trap is a baseless insertion- it could simply be set during such down time.

Like, the fact that you want to say Harry would necessarily be doing important things, and say I would necessarily bash the fic for, you know, giving Hermione screentime to herself, and that the bashing itself would be more accusations of misogyny is just sorta blatantly dishonest. Even if you think I'm just Some Hater, there's no reason I wouldn't use a novel vector of attack.

But no. Instead of paying attention when I say 'I read sixty or so chapters, initially positive on it' you just assume I'm determined to hate it, and am a veritable video game NPC, with only one complaint in my arsenal.

 

[Reveen]

LOL, what? The very first paragraph of the story, says how many science fiction books there are in Harry's house.

Click to shrink...

Science fiction books... like Warhammer 40K?

I mean sure, technically that counts as science fiction. But in the same way that a based on a true story movie about that one guy who got crushed under a boulder and cut his legs off to escape technically counts as a biopic or how processed cheese technically counts as diary. If the Yudzer wanted to make Harry smart by referencing sci-fi there's pissloads of material to draw from. Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, Ursula K. Le Guin. Instead he references fucking Warhammer.

I mean, it's not surprising, there's quite a bit of implicit fash buried in MOR and a lot of other rationalist fiction so Warhammer references make sense.

 

[Aris Katsaris]

The story 'wasting' a chapter is something it did repeatedly,

Click to shrink...

There's a lot of things that a story can do repeatedly but they become crimes of sexism and evidence of misogyny only when it also does them to female characters.

The whole story is centered around Harry & Quirrel. Secondary characters are Draco, Hermione and Dumbledore.

But the above is only evidence of sexism if you don't acknowledge these people's genders are constrained by canon, and it's canon's sexism that the problem of gender balance derives from.

 

[Terrabrand]

There's a lot of things that a story can do repeatedly but they become crimes of sexism and evidence of misogyny only when it also does them to female characters.

The whole story is centered around Harry & Quirrel. Secondary characters are Draco, Hermione and Dumbledore.

But the above is only evidence of sexism if you don't acknowledge these people's genders are constrained by canon, and it's canon's sexism that the problem of gender balance derives from.

Click to shrink...

Except this is a fanfic that regularly rewrites both history and physics of canon. There is no reason it can't also change character genders, levels of importance, or otherwise solve such problems.

Moreover, Draco and Dumbledore do not, in their entirety, have their everything revolve solely around Harry. They are treated as intelligent actors who have their own goals and can succeed without his aid. This is a dodge, and a failure of one.

You only get the defense of 'it's that way in canon' in a very committedly canon compliant fanfic, which MoR is simply not. Therefore, even if I accept Harry Potter as a sexist work, that's an excuse, not a defense. When the author changes how the magic system works, how history played out, and more, pretending gender and level of character importance (while the story alters level of character importance, eg having Draco shove Ron out of the best friend role) are sacred and immutable is blatantly baseless.

 

[MrCogmor]

One thing that annoyed me was some of the world building that explicitly suggested wizard society as a whole were idiots except for Harry. Stuff like Harry getting a plan to make gold through arbitrage even though it a ridiculously easy opportunity that someone should have spotted already. I also disliked how Harry came up with his theory of potion making and it was amazing instead of something taught in the very first potion making class.

I also dislike how certain aspects of the world are overly convenient to Harry e.g how transfiguration works and the patronus thing.

The other thing is about how Harry, Hermione and I think other characters keep applying story book logic or thinking about how reality would go if it ran on stories.

I dislike how it changes from caricaturing wizard society to playing it straight. e.g Draco's Minions are caricatures.

There is stuff like

Hermione Granger had worried she was turning Bad.

The difference between Good and Bad was usually easy to grasp, she'd never understood why other people had so much trouble. At Hogwarts, "Good" was Professor Flitwick and Professor McGonagall and Professor Sprout. "Bad" was Professor Snape and Professor Quirrell and Draco Malfoy. Harry Potter... was one of those unusual cases where you couldn't tell just by looking. She was still trying to figure out where he belonged.

But when it came to herself...

Click to shrink...

It couldn't be that she just enjoyed beating the living scholastic daylights out of the most famous student in the school, someone who was in books and talked like books, the boy who had somehow vanquished the Dark Lord and even smushed Professor Snape like a sad little bug, the boy who was, as Professor Quirrell would have put it, dominant, over everyone else in first-year Ravenclaw except for Hermione Granger who was utterly squishing the Boy-Who-Lived in all his classes besides broomstick riding.

Because that would have been Bad.

No. It was Romance. That was it. That was why they were fighting.

Hermione was glad she had figured this out in time for today, when Harry would lose their book-reading contest, which the whole school knew about, and she wanted to start dancing with the sheer overflowing joy of it.

Click to shrink...

 

[Aris Katsaris]

Moreover, Draco and Dumbledore do not, in their entirety, have their everything revolve solely around Harry. They are treated as intelligent actors who have their own goals and can succeed without his aid. This is a dodge, and a failure of one.

Click to shrink...

Really? How so? What is a single thing they can do, that differs from your complaints about Hermione?

What did Draco ever succeed at, without Harry's aid?

Actually what did Dumbledore ever succeed at (in the story, not e.g against Grindelwald), without Harry's aid?

Stuff like Harry getting a plan to make gold through arbitrage even though it a ridiculously easy opportunity that someone should have spotted already.

Click to shrink...

Harry acknowledges late in the story, that he has no idea if the arbitrage plan of his would work in reality.

Generally all around, the story acknowledges that Harry is less smart than he thinks. His attempts at figuring out magic *fail*, and Hermione makes fun of him for thinking he would figure out in months what wizards have not figured out in centuries.

His only moments where he actually figures out something new comes as a result from a merging of his different background -- science (letting him do partial transfiguration) and transhumanism (letting him do Patronus 2.0). So less intelligence, and more different background assumptions.

 

[Terrabrand]

Really? How so? What is a single thing they can do, that differs from your complaints about Hermione?

What did Draco ever succeed at, without Harry's aid?
Actually what did Dumbledore ever succeed at, in the story, without Harry's aid?

Click to shrink...

You know what? I refuse to continue this conversation myself while all you do is attack, and attack, and attack. You insinuate all kinds of nasty things about me, and then search for weaknesses in my arguments to jump on and hammer, while blatantly refusing to so much as acknowledge any other part of the arguments, let alone deign to concede even a single point.

Either start addressing points you don't believe you have an easy 'gotcha' for, or I won't waste my time further. A good faith argument simply does not involve ignoring every single statement or question you lack an easy 'I win' for. I have treated in good faith to the best of my ability, but all you do is slander me and jump on a new excuse for how I'm wrong, never acknowledging I might have a point, never saying 'I understand' or 'I see' when I explain, just using my words as a new excuse to attack me and my arguments in new ways, but never defending your own arguments.

 

[MrCogmor]

What did Draco ever succeed at, without Harry's aid?
Actually what did Dumbledore ever succeed at, in the story, without Harry's aid?

Click to shrink...

If characters can't accomplish anything significant without Harry's help then Harry is a textbook Mary Sue.

 

[Aris Katsaris]

You know what? I refuse to continue this conversation myself while all you do is attack, and attack, and attack.

Click to shrink...

LOL, what?

insinuate all kinds of nasty things about me, and then search for weaknesses in my arguments to jump on and hammer, while blatantly refusing to so much as acknowledge any other part of the arguments, let alone deign to concede even a single point.

Click to shrink...

What point should I have conceded? Did *you* even bother to concede the obvious hilarious piece of untruth you spoke previously that supposedly Harry grew up in a house without fiction books!

Either start addressing points you don't believe you have an easy 'gotcha' for, or I won't waste my time further.

Click to shrink...

What the fuck?

No, I'm not obliged to address *every* single sentence you make.

But fine, what points would you like me to address? That the story *should* have *genderflipped* characters, just to achieve a better gender balance?
AFAIK, genderflipping characters is generally frowned upon, unless genderflipping them is the whole point of the story. And if EY had genderflipped them, then any deviation of characterization between them and the original would have been even more "evidence" of sexism.

If characters can't accomplish anything significant without Harry's help then Harry is a textbook Mary Sue.

Click to shrink...

Which is a different criticism than the story being sexist, and a criticism I don't much care to oppose, because it's indeed a more valid one.

Science fiction books... like Warhammer 40K?

Click to shrink...

Are you shifting goalposts? Previously the hilariously wrong claim by Terrabrand was that there were no fiction books period in his house. Now *you* are complaining, what, that Warhammer 40k itself isn't specifically mentioned in the first paragraph of the story, but nonetheless referenced later.

What is the rule here that you believe the story should have followed and didn't?

f the Yudzer wanted to make Harry smart by referencing sci-fi there's pissloads of material to draw from. Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, Ursula K. Le Guin.

Click to shrink...

Harry references lots of SF works too, as far as I can remember, Ender's Game most prominently among them, obviously.

 

[Terrabrand]

What the fuck?

No, I'm not obliged to address *every* single sentence you make.

But fine, what points would you like me to address? That the story *should* have *genderflipped* characters, just to achieve a better gender balance?
AFAIK, genderflipping characters is generally frowned upon, unless genderflipping them is the whole point of the story. And if EY had genderflipped them, then any deviation of characterization between them and the original would have been even more "evidence" of sexism.

Click to shrink...

Fine, one last good faith go. Rewriting the canon laws of Special Powers is also generally frowned upon, unless the base premise. He did it anyways.

He was completely comfortable ignoring canon when it suited him. But making a not sexist story? Not a priority. Nevermind he actually made a far more sexist work.

As to addressing things...

Ah, yes. Hermione challenges and opposes Harry... By buying fully into his bizarre and unusual worldview. Harry becomes the 'General' of a ridiculous and absurd game of full contact paintball, and therefore Hermione also buys fully into the paradigm of full contact paintball being important. Harry acts as if he is the Hero Chosen By Destiny in an absurd and cliche video game plot; Hermione challenges this by creating a League of Ineffectual Witches who immediately get in over their heads and are ultimately saved by Harry Potter's Magnificent Plan.

At no point does Hermione's 'intelligence' allow her to actually meaningfully question or oppose Harry or his worldview; on the contrary, every act that she takes, even the ones that 'oppose' him, serve the narrative purpose of promoting him.

Now, as far as Hermione's getting killed offscreen goes, It's been a while since I read this bit, so I misremembered slightly- Hermione doesn't die offscreen, she is eaten alive offscreen and survives with barely enough energy to pitifully mewl that her death wasn't Harry's fault.

Which makes sense, as her death isn't about her- Much like every other portion of her character, it's designed to move Harry's story forward. Here is the section where it happens (End of Chapter 88, start of chapter 89):



Ironically, I'd still say that this counts as being killed offscreen, given the damage has been done before we have a chance to see it; We aren't given a chance to see Hermione's desperate last stand, which would be an actual opportunity for the story to show her fighting for her own sake and her own life.

In fact, the story goes for double the pain; Hermione gets killed offscreen, and then dies in Harry's arms.

(Please note: During the process of Hermione's death, Harry kills the Troll with astonishing ease, transfiguring it's brain into acid in the space of a single sentence. Just in case you thought the creature that savagely murdered his 'rival' was actually a meaningful threat to him, or something.)

Now, I know you're not going to actually accept any of this criticism- Less Wrong fanatics never do, not when they can just go 'no u r a sneer artist' instead- but I felt like it was worth the time to establish what actually happened in the show, since your baseless assertion that I didn't actually read the fic might have muddied the waters otherwise.

Click to shrink...

Grimnir makes this lengthy detailed post. You quote less than a sentence to say this:

So basically damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. There's no plausible course of action whatsoever that Hermione could have taken that would have left you satisfied. If she is better at him in classes, this is bad, because it compares her to him. If she opposes him ethically as she does and attacks his decision and judgment, as she does, this is bad because it's "buying fully into his bizarre worldview". If she forces him to take his transfiguration experiments to McGonaggal and Dumbledore for prudence's sake, and Harry acknowledges and apologizes to her for being right all along, that's bad because of... whatever.

Click to shrink...

Rather than acknowledge or disprove anything he said, you elect to rewrite reality to being he would be dissatisfied with all possible realities. @Grimnir, would you say the original Harry Potter books were sexist?

After all, if the answer is 'no', that proves that there are versions of reality with Hermione that are not sexist in Grimnir's mind, after all.

Likewise, you jumping back to go 'oh but you didn't concede a point, therefore I don't have to argue at all!' is more attacking weakness crap, not actually addressing any but the weakest statements, not even to admit they happened.

As it happens, sure, I misremembered. I believe it was probably the fact that Harry had no fantasy books that I misremembered as having no fiction books, which is indeed a difference. I did not consider that worth a post on it's own, in large part because, once again, that was an attack on the weakest point.

Why is Harry making all these references? Why does no one recognize them in universe? These questions are not answered by him potentially having read the source materials, maybe. But instead, you just try to bust me for misremembering and put no effort into addressing why he might be reference man.

Likewise, before I concluded you were dealing clearly without good faith, you pulled less than a sentence to insinuate that I am baselessly accusing it of sexism, while claiming it 'inherited' canon's gender balance. Hmmm, what's this:

No, I specified from the start, that I could count at least 8 girls with characterization in HPMOR in Harry's year, as opposed to only Hermione in the original.

I didn't forget Ginny's and Luna's existence in the original series, I assure you.

What is Lavender & Parvati like in the original Harry Potter? Where were they, that it was Ron & Harry that had to rescue Hermione from the troll in the bathroom?

Lavender & Parvati didn't exist at all, in the original HP.

And I would argue that Ginny never started existing at all, even in later books, except as Harry's love interest.

Click to shrink...

Oh right. You proudly claiming it altered the gender balance, by fleshing out less used characters. So, tell me? Why should I not hold it's sexism against it, when it is willing to elevate no namers, but not actually have any independently important female characters?

You have a quantum defense here: MoR is better than canon, look how it did better, oh but it's only because it was constrained by canon's gender balance it has these fictional, perceived issues.

At best, it did better than canon. I disagree, but saying it was constrained by canon (that it ignores large parts of) is a lie, and a bad dodge for the fact it is sexist.

Unless you'd like to explain how it isn't, rather than 'it's not sexist' *get disproven* 'it's not it's fault!'. Rather than concede the point, you turn it into not it's responsibility. But only after you fail to excuse away the flagrantly sexist elements.

Likewise...

But fine, what points would you like me to address? That the story *should* have *genderflipped* characters, just to achieve a better gender balance?
AFAIK, genderflipping characters is generally frowned upon, unless genderflipping them is the whole point of the story. And if EY had genderflipped them, then any deviation of characterization between them and the original would have been even more "evidence" of sexism.

Click to shrink...

This is bullshit that starts from the position that you are not only right argumentatively, but that you are correct about a negative preconception of me- that in all possible versions of MoR, no matter what he did, I would be screaming 'sexism', because I'm not reacting to anything, I'm looking for things to hate. I have no evidence of sexism, I only have "evidence", which is to say I am self evidently wrong.

Because you said so. Not that you'll, you know, offer proof, or explain how something I have called out as sexist is, in fact, not. Oh no. Just imply I'm looking for excuses and have no arguments, rather than addressing the ones I put forward. While you meanwhile retreat behind yet another new 'defense', having abandoned the prior rather than, you know, defending your argument.

This is uncivil, even if we assume it's true. Rather than attacking the argument, you attack me to try to claim I have no point and would always make up bullshit to hate the story for, for, uh, reasons. And therefore all my arguments can be ignored and/or dismissed out of hand. Because.

Because I'm obviously just making shit up and not trying to argue in good faith.

If you genuinely think that, report me. Don't just drop constant implied character attacks while bluntly refusing to address any argument you neither can call out on some technicality nor try to spin into me being a Bad Person Who Is Wrong Because I Just Hate The Work Because I Want To, rather than, you know, for the actual content.

I can be wrong about points. I acknowledge that. But trying to turn me into That Guy That Is Making Up Whatever Justifies His Hateboner is both wrong and uncivil.

 

[MrCogmor]

His only moments where he actually figures out something new comes as a result from a merging of his different background -- science (letting him do partial transfiguration) and transhumanism (letting him do Patronus 2.0). So less intelligence, and more different background assumptions.

Click to shrink...

Yud changed the magic systems to allow that kind of stuff so it is still overly convenient. That defense also doesn't apply to the potion making theory which the wizards should have though of even if they were limited to largely medieval thought. How else would they invent new potions?

There is also no excuse for the stupid story logic the characters use and how people keep talking in videogame or story tropes.

About Hermione

"Being a friend is not something you can be forced to, Miss Granger." The blue eyes seemed to look right through her. "The feelings are there, or they are not. If they are there, you can accept them or deny them. You are Harry's friend—and choosing to deny it would wound him terribly, perhaps beyond healing. But Miss Granger, what would drive you to such extremes?"

She couldn't find words. She'd never been able to find words. "If you get too near Harry—you get swallowed up, and no one sees you any more, you're just something of his, everyone thinks the whole world revolves around him and…" She didn't have the words.

The old wizard nodded slowly. "It is indeed an unjust world we live in, Miss Granger. All the world now knows that it is I who defeated Grindelwald, and fewer remember Elizabeth Beckett who died opening the way so I could pass through. And yet she is remembered. Harry Potter is the hero of this play, Miss Granger; the world does revolve around him. He is destined for great things; and I ween that in time the name of Albus Dumbledore will be remembered as Harry Potter's mysterious old wizard, more than for anything else I have done. And perhaps the name of Hermione Granger will be remembered as his companion, if you prove worthy of it in your day. For this I tell you true: never will you find more glory on your own, than in Harry Potter's company."

Hermione shook her head rapidly. "But that's not—" She'd known she wouldn't be able to explain. "It's not about glory, it's about being— something that belongs to someone else!"

"So you think you would rather be the hero?" The old wizard sighed. "Miss Granger, I have been a hero, and a leader; and I would have been a thousand times happier if I could have belonged to someone like Harry Potter. Someone made of sterner stuff than I, to make the hard decisions, and yet worthy to lead me. I thought, once, that I knew such a man, but I was mistaken… Miss Granger, you have no idea at all how fortunate are those like you, compared to heroes."

Click to shrink...

I find it hilarious how meta this thing is even though Hermione's decisions from this make no sense. She wants to be able to keep up with Harry so she can support him or be equally important. Instead of training, advancing ,trying to figure out and copy whatever makes Harry so special or anything like that she instead decides to make protests and beat up school bullies. There is also the blatant story logic of assuming reality follows tropes shown below.

"My dear," said the old wizard, "after you have dealt with your thirtieth hero or so, you will realize that they react quite predictably to certain things; such as being told that they are too young, or that they are not destined to be heroes, or that being a hero is unpleasant; and if you truly wish to be sure you should tell them all three. Although," with a brief sigh, "it does not do to be too blatant, or your Deputy Headmistress might catch you." "Albus," Minerva said, her voice even tighter, "if she is hurt, I swear this time I'll—" "She would have come to that same place in due time," Albus said, the distant sad look still in his eyes. "If someone is meant to become a hero then they will not listen to our warnings, Minerva, no matter how hard we try. And given that, it is better for Harry if Miss Granger does not fall too far behind him." Albus produced, as though from nowhere, a tin which flipped open to reveal small yellow lumps, she'd never been able to figure out where he kept it and she'd never been able to detect the magic involved. "Lemon drop?" "She is a twelve-year-old girl, Albus!

Click to shrink...

or stuff like

But Hermione was very very aware that even if she was doing it with signed permission, she was still Defying Authority.

After she'd decided to be a hero, Hermione had done the obvious thing, and gone to the Hogwarts library and taken out books on how to be a hero. Then she'd returned those books back to their shelves, because it'd been patently obvious that none of the authors had been actual heroes themselves. Instead she'd just read five times over, until she'd memorized every word, the thirty inches by Godric Gryffindor that was all his autobiography and his life's advice. (Or the English translation, anyway; she couldn't read Latin yet.) Godric Gryffindor's autobiography had been a lot more compressed than the books Hermione was used to reading, he used one sentence to say things that should've taken thirty inches just by themselves, and then there was another sentence after that…

But it was clear from what she'd read that, while Defying Authority wasn't the point of being a hero, you couldn't be a hero if you were too scared to do it. And Hermione Granger knew by now how others saw her, and she knew what other people thought she couldn't do.

Click to shrink...

"Hero" is a label. It is not a career choice or a fundamental pattern in the universe. Hermione should know this.

 

[Aris Katsaris]

That defense also doesn't apply to the potion making theory which the wizards should have though of even if they were limited to largely medieval thought.

Click to shrink...

You're misremembering. Harry didn't invent the potion making theory, the wizards did know about it -- it's explicitly stated that "Harry had not made an original magical discovery, but rediscovered a law so ancient that nobody knew who had first formulated it: A potion spends that which is invested in the creation of its ingredients."

 

[MrCogmor]

You're misremembering. Harry didn't invent the potion making theory, the wizards did know about it -- it's explicitly stated that "Harry had not made an original magical discovery, but rediscovered a law so ancient that nobody knew who had first formulated it: A potion spends that which is invested in the creation of its ingredients."

Click to shrink...

I'm still complaining that it isn't taught in the first potions class because it would be incredibly basic theory.