Reddit is a horrible place to have intelligent discussions
This article by Dr Piotr Wozniak is part of SuperMemo Guru series on memory, learning, creativity, and problem solving.
Summary
Reddit totally screwed its karma reward system. Instead of promoting civility, it promotes debate impotence. An intelligent and knowledgeable debater, sticking to all rules of politeness, should quickly accumulate a lot of negative karma. Unfortunately, this is instantly penalized at Reddit. As a result, a platform designed for intelligent discussions makes all debates infertile.
This is a story of my amazement with Reddit's blunder. My 1-2 weeks long life on Reddit makes me wonder how a reputable company could have gotten it all so backwards!
Going Reddit
Someone read my text Inevitability of incremental reading and commented on Reddit that "incremental reading is not new because even Piotr Wozniak admits that Niels Bohr used it before 1962". The comment is inaccurate. I used the term "intermittent reading" to hypothesize about, and to approximate Bohr's reasoning, but Bohr could not have used incremental reading before the era of computers. Playing with paper is fun. It expresses the urge of a scientist to use incremental reading; however, it is equivalent to a claim that Herman Hollerith or Ada Lovelace engaged in programming. All those great minds of the past did not have a computer to enjoy the endless fun of programming or incremental reading.
Ever vigilant Palace noticed the error of the poster and speedily corrected the misunderstanding. However, instead of engaging into a dispute, he suggested I replied directly to explain the meaning of my own words. As I started dabbling in social media only a few years ago, I never had a Reddit account. Palace convinced me that one can set up an account in minutes. He added that engaging in Reddit could be helpful in promoting SuperMemo as much as promoting the cause of free learning (see: End School Slavery).
I set up an account and started exploring. I immediately spotted a great deal of fantastic subreddits on unschooling, anti-schooling, homeschooling, etc.
Why do we debate?
Pause for a second to answer the question: "What is the purpose of an intelligent debate?". Even if your answer is hazy, you know it instinctively. For well-schooled people, zero-sum gamesmanship is a well-ingrained habit. For the well-schooled, the purpose of the debate is to win (see: 100 bad habits learned at school). A well-schooled debater can participate in an Oxford debate and feel equally well on either side of the barricade. For well-schooled people, the truth is secondary. The battle itself and winning is the prime purpose. I have no doubt that schooling then gave origin to the horrible karma system of Reddit. Karma was set up to keep the debate civil. That's a good intent with disastrous side effects.
In a rational world, the purpose of a debate is to find discrepancies between models of reality built in the brains of the debaters. Once discrepancies are found, the debate should seek reconciliation of evidence that produces the difference in models. A good debate is more enjoyable than traditional learning. It is more fruitful. Human brain can instantly identify the evidence that underlies the model. Even artificial intelligence finds it hard to compete with another human being in that task. Humans are better because their models are simple and flawed. Finding flaws is the key. AI models are based on the knowledge of the entire mankind. They are great moderators in debates. They are great providers of knowledge needed for reconciliation. However, human-to-human debate is still more productive and incredible fun. Debates are the basis of social change. Pity Reddit totally screwed the concept. The fun of human debates is learning!
Crashing out of Reddit
In accordance with the principles of a good debate, I searched for places I could learn most from. When I hit "Homeschool Recovery", subreddit, I found a goldmine of inspiration. I realized that homeschoolers imprisoned by their own parents, do not blame the parents for their fate. They blame homeschooling!
When someone maligned the concept of unschooling I remarked that I would gladly provide scientific evidence to anyone ready to discuss the topic from the point of view of an imprisoned homeschooler. This resulted in an instant expulsion from that subreddit. After the fact, I realized they have "no debate" as a condition sine qua non of participation. That subreddit is supposedly just a place for complaining. That's ok. Their subreddit, their rules.
Then on some teacher's forum, I mentioned the value of freedom and free learning and the name of Peter Gray. My karma started plummeting. That did not bother me because accolades and praise is not what I came to Reddit for. Little did I realize that it was the first step to my expulsion from Reddit.
I posted on a few topics at r/education, r/unschool and r/Schoolchoice. One by one, my posts were removed by Reddit filters or moderators. I think the last straw was my post on Trump. To all good people who are horrified with a vision of "4 more years", I posted a tiny consolation from wonderful Kerry McDonald: What Would Really Happen If the US Department of Education Went Away?.
After some 1-2 weeks of life on Reddit, I had karma of a villain, and a clean slate of zero posts accepted (all 5 removed). My account disappeared! My past comments are marked as /deleted/ wreaking havoc on the flow of conversations. My short life on Reddit messed up the logic of the knowledge base. I left no documented contribution. My work is gone and dead (except for the usual backup in my personal archives in SuperMemo).
I am not complaining. At least I have this text as a testimony to the pathologies of the well-schooled world! Due to the uncivil nature of schooled people, social media gets schooled, and intelligence is curbed.
Suggested solution
Instead of conglomerating civility, intelligence and compliance into a single metric of karma, Reddit should separate impoliteness from disagreements. Simple flags such as Disagree, Spam, Rude or Evil could do the job. Learn from Facebook! Let people express love! Do not penalize disagreement as it is a critical part of an intelligent debate. If I keep getting Polite + Disagreement, I should be the most precious asset on the platform. Sadly, my politeness counted for nothing, and my debate contributions lead to negative karma and prompt expulsion.
Being radical
This is not the first time I get kicked out of the door on entry. Wikipedia was my love at first sight! I wanted to be a contributor too. In 2001, I contributed a short article on Sleep and memory. It was soon removed by no one else but the founder himself: Larry Sanger. Larry complained I promoted unverified science. He backed up his words with the authority of Encarta. Little did he realize that Encarta text was written by Jerome Siegel who was the leader of conservative forces denying the role of sleep in learning. It did not take long for me to realize that I can only contribute to Wikipedia by correcting typos. It was no place to promote cutting-edge knowledge or engage in an intelligent edit debate. I quit. I have never stopped loving Wikipedia as a user and learner though. Today, such lovely texts as Sleep and memory or Sleep and learning stand as a testimony to the fact that truth is the ultimate winner.
My ventures into other social media platforms often resulted in expulsions, bans and banishment. I never curse. I never berate. My only offense is that I disagree. See: Value of wrong models
Knowledge and Radicalism
In the early days of incremental reading, in a swimming pool, Tomek Szynalski asked me about the effect of many years of spaced repetition on the brain. I told him that from a personal viewpoint, the brain does not feel any different before and after decades of spaced repetition. There is no pleasant feeling of being smarter than others or smarter than former self! The difference is totally imperceptible. However, all my expulsions from social platforms are knowledge based. I have been radical and extreme from my youngest years. I insist this does not come from innate personality or from the genes (e.g. we had no radicals in the family). Radical combat for value stems from freedom in youth and in later years (see: Great personalities do not come from genes). My difficulties with fitting in in social groups combine (1) radical thinking and (2) knowledge that enhances radical thinking.
It is not my innate radicalism that is the problem. Knowledge is! A good illustration is my violent opposition to coercive schooling. Having survived 22 years in the "system", I was totally blind to the harms of coercion in schooling. I just knew how to defend myself and never suffered the consequences (see: How I invented perfect schooling). Only by studying the causes for which so many people fail to thrive in education, I realized the fault is not with people but with the system. The more I learn, the more radical I get. No wonder, my instant negative karma at Reddit came from my support for unschoolers, homeschoolers, and the opposition to compulsory schooling. My failure at Wikipedia 2001 also stemmed from the fact that my knowledge of the science of sleep was a bit too far ahead of the pack.
With incremental reading, I tripled the speed of acquiring knowledge. Today, I still keep accelerating courtesy of ChatGPT. My radicalism increases, and my inexperienced entry into Reddit had the ending written on the wall. Reddit does not like the knowledgeable accustomed to speaking the truth against the grain.