My own thoughts on LessWrong culture, specifically focused on things I personally don't like about it (while acknowledging it does many things well). I say this as someone who cares a lot about epistemic rationality in my own thinking, and aspire to be more rational and calibrated in a number of ways.

Broadly, I tend not to like many of the posts here that are not about AI. The main exception are posts that are focused on objective reality, with specific, tightly focused arguments (eg). 

• I think many of the posts here tend to be overtheorized, and not enough effort being spent on studying facts and categorizing empirical regularities about the world (in science, the difference between a "Theory" and a "Law").
  • My premium of life post is an example of the type of post I wish other people write more of.
• Many of the commentators also some seem to have background theories about the world that to me seem implausibly neat (eg a lot of folk evolutionary-psychology, a common belief regulation drives everything)
• Good epistemics is built on a scaffolding of facts, and I do not believe that many people on LessWrong spent enough effort checking whether their load-bearing facts are true.
• Many of the posts here have a high verbal tilt; I think verbal explanations are good for explaining concepts you already understand very well to normal people, but verbal reasoning is not a reliable guide to discovering truth. In contrast, they tend to be lighter on statistics, data and simple mathematical reasoning.
• The community overall seems more tolerant of post-rationality and "woo" than I would've expected the standard-bearers of rationality to be.
• The comments I like the most tend to be ones that are a) tightly focused, b) easy to understand factual or logical claims, c) either/both focused on important load-bearing elements of the original arguments and/or easy to address, and d) crafted in a way to not elicit strong emotional reactions from either your debate partner or any onlookers.
  • Here are some comments of mine I like in this vein.
  • I think the EA Forum is epistemically better than LessWrong in some key ways, especially outside of highly politicized topics. Notably, there is a higher appreciation of facts and factual corrections.
    • Relatedly, this is why I don't agree with broad generalizations of LW in general having "better epistemics"
• Finally, I dislike the arrogant, brash, confident, tone of many posts on LessWrong. Plausibly, I think a lot of this is inherited from Eliezer, who is used to communicating complex ideas to people less intelligent and/or rational than he is. This is not the experience of a typical poster on LessWrong, and I think it's maladaptive for people to use Eliezer's style and epistemic confidence in their own writings and thinking.

I realize that this quick take is quite hypocritical in that it displays the same flaws I criticized, as are some of my recent posts. I'm also drafting a post arguing against hypocrisy being a major anti-desiderata, so at least I'm not meta-hypocritical about the whole thing.