Explicitly nonfictional stories would be better, though of course certain concerns apply to posting such information and it might be harder to find good examples.
I'm not sure what the relevance is here.
Yes, no, yes, yes. This is a very well-written post, incidentally. Good work.
Fifthed.
Karma doesn't mean "rationality points," and Aumann rationality has additional prerequisites anyway. My judgement stands, though I of course would revise that opinion if confronted with additional evidence. For reference, I put far more credence to the proposition "Kevin runs Clippy" than to the proposition "Clippy is a real (limited) paperclip-maximizer."
To clarify, Eliezer Yudkowsky is working both on a book and on the Harry Potter fanfiction in question. Both pertain to rationality.
Are you joking? Clippy is a gimmick poster on the Internet based on a common (if extreme) example.
"He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead." --anonymous
The last time I really checked (which was back in the early days), you had a far higher than normal proportion of posts with negative karma, which is the main thing that I use to evaluate a poster's status. In general I find total karma to be unreliable because karma seems generally linked to post count (in the old days, this link was quite direct).
However, looking back now I see that your recent comments appear to have been much more generally appreciated. I am not as active as I would like and therefore haven't seen many of these comments. This was quite an interesting discovery, as it made me aware of a greater need to evaluate status in the present state and account for shifts over time, so thanks, I guess.
I would rather have examples that better conform to reality than examples that are better characterizations of the principles in question.