Cross-posted on the EA Forum.

I've been meaning to write about this for some time, and @titotal's recent post finally made me do it:

I was going to post a comment in his post, but I think this topic deserves a post of its own.

My plea is simply: Please, oh please reconsider using adjectives that reflect a negative judgment ("bad", "stupid", "boring") on the Forum, and instead stick to indisputable facts and observations ("I disagree", "I doubt", "I dislike", etc.).

This suggestion is motivated by one of the central ideas behind nonviolent communication (NVC), which I'm a big fan of and which I consider a core life skill. The idea is simply that judgments (typically in the form of adjectives) are disputable/up to interpretation, and therefore can lead to completely unnecessary misunderstandings and hurt feelings:

• Me: Ugh, the kitchen is dirty again. Why didn't you do the dishes yesterday?
• You, triggered: I don't think it's dirty at all. I even wiped the countertop. It's just a few dishes, gosh.
• [Escalation ensues]

People may interpret the word "dirty" very differently, which can lead to endless and unproductive back-and-forth. And a ton of conflict between people follows that simple template ("our flat is really messy," "your performance at work has been quite poor," "the talk you gave was boring," "your AI timeline models are bad"). NVC says: drop the adjectives and focus on indisputable facts, such as how you feel about the situation. Then move on to specific requests. You can convey pretty much the same information without triggering pushback or defensiveness. For example, titotal's post could have just as well been titled:

• My disagreements with AI 2027's timeline models
• Why I doubt AI 2027's timeline models
• Or really, just: A deep critique of AI 2027's timeline models

In my experience talking about this with EAs, the two most common arguments against following this heuristic are:

1. But some judgments are correct and accurate! So we shouldn't mince our words just to avoid making some people upset.

For example, maybe you think the kitchen is dirty by any reasonable definition of "dirty". You even take a picture of the kitchen, ask r/AmIOverreacting for input, and discover that 98% of redditors agree with you that the kitchen is dirty. Ha!

But NVC says: that's not the point! You might be totally justified in believing the kitchen is dirty, but if you end up antagonizing the other person so that they don't want to engage with you in the future, you're losing. And the thing is, you could have gotten exactly what you wanted (e.g., a cleaner kitchen) simply by being more mindful of your use of adjectives. Do you not want to be winning?

2. But the adjective I chose conveys something specific that I can't otherwise convey by just stating my feelings. Saying "I didn't like your presentation" is just not the same as "Your presentation was too dry".

I think this is a knee-jerk reaction by those who just haven't gotten used to avoiding judgments, or who are too used to being very blunt through adjectives (perhaps so much so that it's become part of their identity). In my experience (and that of my friends), you can always find a way to convey the exact same point in some less judgmental way. It may feel a bit unnatural at first, but it gets easier, and the benefits are huge.

So what, are we canceling adjectives? Obviously not. My heuristic is:

• If the stakes are high, take a moment to think whether you can avoid the adjective. Examples of high-stakes situations:
  • You're about to tell your partner something big that bothers you
  • You're about to give some difficult quarterly feedback to your teammate
  • You're about to post a detailed critique of a major piece of AI forecasting that will likely go viral
• Otherwise, don't sweat it.

I know Jonas and Daniel from AI 2027, and I know they are unusually good at dealing with criticism. But even highly rational people can find it upsetting to read their hard work being judged in such terms. I also consider myself pretty thick-skinned when it comes to judgments, but I still occasionally flinch a bit when someone leaves a Google Doc comment saying that my doc is [insert adjective]. The thing with NVC is that, once you see it, you can't unsee it. Sadly, I see judgments everywhere on the Forum, and I'm not surprised that people feel scared to post.

I'm super impressed by titotal's post (and most of what he writes!). But now there's this little part of my brain that thinks "ugh, not sure he's someone I'd like to engage with." I hope it goes without saying that this post is not at all about him (and I'm sorry for putting him in the spotlight here). My hope is just to help create a more welcoming atmosphere on the Forum. Or at least one that's not downright bad.

Addendum: Positive judgments

What about positive judgments ("your dissertation is excellent!", "your blog post is so smart!")? I think the same applies! I think there might be some examples and arguments in the classic NVC book by Marshall Rosenberg, or in one of his workshops on YouTube. So check those out if you're curious to learn more.