Alright, lets see<p>&gt; Having hanged around LessWrong for quite some time, I&#x27;m pretty sure this point is false. How am I to show it however? Dump the whole site to show the absence of such purges?<p>To refute the above statement, only one statement to the contrary would be a good start - it would provide me with enough evidence to consider your side of the story and think that perhaps the critique isn&#x27;t completely fair.<p>&gt; Quite a lot has been said there, we&#x27;re bound to find unacceptable behaviour somewhere.<p>This can be said for any popular community. Does that mean we should not critique them? Or that some how invalidate any criticism against them? No.<p>The thing you&#x27;re missing here is not the number of counter-examples, but a general cultural trend. HN, for example, is a tech oriented community, but political discussion isn&#x27;t anathema here. I can show this by reading a few posts and noticing how people are comfortable discussing differentiating political opinions here. It&#x27;s not perfect argument, but it&#x27;s a good start, and goes a long way towards making me appreciate the environment.<p>Here, there is an important role played by so called &quot;leaders&quot; in community and how tolerant they are as well, by the way. And I know for a fact that Elizer isn&#x27;t one of them. Then again, what else do you expect from a guy who tries to edit his own Wikipedia page.<p>&gt;  If the criticism can indeed apply to all groups, then it effectively applies to none, because it doesn&#x27;t provide a way to discriminate different groups.<p>I&#x27;d happily accept this if you specifically mention which criticism in the parent link can be applied to all. The critique is very, <i>very</i> specific. It starts by defining what Bayes Theorem is, what LW and their ilk think about it, more of their pseudo-intellectual talk, the cult of personality, the AI apocalypse doomsday scenarios, etc etc.