[ExI] ANNOUNCE: New "Artificial General Intelligence" discussion list on Google Groups

[Richard Loosemore]

In response to the imminent closure of the AGI discussion list, I just 
set this up as an alternative:

http://groups.google.com/group/artificial-general-intelligence

Full name of the group is "Artificial General Intelligence" but the 
short name is AGI-group.  (Note that there is already a google group 
called Artificial General Intelligence, but it appears to be spam-dead.)

Its purpose is to encourage polite and well-informed discussion, so it 
will be moderated to that effect.

Allow me to explain my rationale.  In the past I felt like posting 
substantial content to the AGI list because it seemed that there were 
some people who were well-informed enough to engage in discussion. These 
days, the noise level is so high that I have no interest, because I know 
that the people who would give serious thought to real issues are just 
not listening anymore.

I understand that Ben Goertzel is trying to solve this by setting up the 
H+ forum on AGI.  I wish him luck in this, of course, and I myself have 
joined that forum and will participate if there is useful material 
there.  But I also prefer the faster, easier format of a discussion list 
WHEN THAT LIST IS CONTROLLED.  Consider this to be an experiment, then. 
  If it works, it works.  If not, then not.

Anyone can join.

But if there are people who

   (a) send ad hominem remarks

   (b) rant on about fringe topics

   (c) persistently introduce irrelevant material

... they will first be subjected to KILLTHREADs, and then if it does not 
stop they will be banned.  This process will be escalated slowly, and 
anything as drastic as a ban will be preceded by soliciting the opinions 
of the group if it is a borderline case.

Wow!  That sounds draconian!  Who is to say what is "fringe" and what is 
way out there, but potentially valuable?

Well, the best I can offer is this.  I have over 25 years' experience of 
research in AI, physics and psychology, and I have also investigated 
other "fringe" areas like scientific parapsychology, so I consider my 
standards to be very tolerant when it comes to new ideas (after all, I 
have some outlier ideas of my own), but also savvy enough to know when 
someone is puncturing the envelope, rather than pushing it.


So here goes.  You are all invited to join at the above address.

For the serious people:  let's try to establish a standard early on.




Richard Loosemore