本文探讨了Scott Alexander博客评论区的质量变化，将当前的ACX评论区与早期的SSC评论区进行对比。作者引用了多位评论者的观点，有人认为评论质量下降，讨论不如以往；也有人认为作者写作本身并未退步，社区体验反而更佳。文章提出，评论区的质量变化可能影响整体阅读体验，并结合数据分析，指出评论质量的下滑可能与作者写作风格的调整及平台迁移（从SSC到ACX）的时间点相吻合，引发了关于社区与作者共同价值的思考。

📊 **评论区质量的自我认知与数据挑战**: ACX评论区（Astral Codex Ten）的读者群体自认为是互联网上最优秀的评论社区。然而，文章作者通过数据分析发现，与早期SSC（Slate Star Codex）时期相比，ACX评论区的质量在某些指标上出现了明显下滑，这与作者个人的主观感受（认为社区质量未下降）形成了鲜明对比。

📈 **作者写作与社区体验的关联性**: 文章探讨了关于作者Scott Alexander写作质量的争议，以及评论区质量变化是否会影响整体阅读体验。部分评论者认为，即使作者写作水平依旧，评论社区的衰退也会导致整体价值的降低，即“作者+评论区”的整体效能下降。

📉 **评论质量下滑的时间节点**: 文章根据评论者的反馈和数据分析，指出了评论质量可能出现下滑的两个关键时间点：2016年中期（与作者早期写作风格的讨论相关）和2021年初（平台从SSC迁移至ACX）。这表明社区的变迁可能与质量变化存在一定的关联性。

💬 **社区成员对质量变化的多元看法**: 评论区内对质量变化的看法存在分歧。例如，David Friedman和kfix认为评论不如SSC时期有趣，讨论质量下降；而Verbamundi Consulting则认为作者写作多样，评论社区依然优秀，并未感受到明显退步。这种多元的观点凸显了衡量社区质量的复杂性。

Jul 26, 2025

Finalist #5 in the Review Contest

[This is one of the finalists in the 2025 review contest, written by an ACX reader who will remain anonymous until after voting is done. I’ll be posting about one of these a week for several months. When you’ve read them all, I’ll ask you to vote for a favorite, so remember which ones you liked]

Introduction

The Astral Codex Ten (ACX) Commentariat is defined as the 24,485 individuals other than Scott who have contributed to the corpus of work of Scott’s blog posts, chiefly by leaving comments at the bottom of those posts. It is well understood (by the Commentariat themselves) that they are the best comments section anywhere on the internet, and have been for some time. This review takes it as a given that the ACX Commentariat outclasses all of its pale imitators across the web, so I won’t compare the ACX Commentariat to e.g. reddit. The real question is whether our glory days are behind us – specifically whether the ACX Commentariat of today has lost its edge compared to the SSC Commentariat of pre-2021.

A couple of years ago Scott asked, Why Do I Suck?. This was a largely tongue-in-cheek springboard to discuss a substantive criticism he regularly received - that his earlier writing was better than his writing now. How far back do we need to go before his writing was ‘good’? Accounts seemed to differ; Scott said that the feedback he got was of two sorts:

“I loved your articles from about 2013 - 2016 so much! Why don’t you write articles like that any more?”, which dates the decline to 2016 “Do you feel like you’ve shifted to less ambitious forms of writing with the new Substack?”, which dates the decline to 2021

Quite a few people responded in the comments that Scott’s writing hadn’t changed, but it was the experience of being a commentor which had worsened. For example, David Friedman, a prolific commentor on the blog in the SSC-era, writes:

A lot of what I liked about SSC was the commenting community, and I find the comments here less interesting than they were on SSC, fewer interesting arguments, which is probably why I spend more time on [an alternative forum] than on ACX.

Similarly, kfix seems to be a long-time lurker (from as early as 2016) who has become more active in the ACX-era, writes:

I would definitely agree that the commenting community here is 'worse' than at SSC along the lines you describe, along with the also unwelcome hurt feelings post whenever Scott makes an offhand joke about a political/cultural topic.

And of course, this position wasn’t unanimous. Verbamundi Consulting is a true lurker who has only ever made one post on the blog – this one:

Ok, I've been lurking for a while, but I have to say: I don't think you suck… You have a good variety of topics, your commenting community remains excellent, and you're one of the few bloggers I continue to follow.

The ACX Commentariat is somewhat unique in that it self-styles itself as a major reason to come and read Scott’s writing – Scott offers up some insights on an issue, and then the comments section engages unusually open and unusually respectful discussion of the theme, and the total becomes greater than the sum of the parts. Therefore, if the Commentariat has declined in quality it may disproportionately affect people’s experience of Scott’s posts. The joint value of each Scott-plus-Commentariat offering declines if the Commentariat are not pulling their weight, even if Scott himself remains just as good as ever. In Why Do I Suck? Scott suggests that there is weak to no evidence of a decline in his writing quality, so I propose this review as something of a companion piece; is the (alleged) problem with the blog, in fact, staring at us in the mirror?

My personal view aligns with Verbamundi Consulting and many other commentors - I’ve enjoyed participating in both the SSC and ACX comments, and I haven’t noticed any decline in Commentariat quality. So, I was extremely surprised to find the data totally contradicted my anecdotal experience, and indicated a very clear dropoff in a number of markers of quality at almost exactly the points Scott mentioned in Why Do I Suck? – one in mid-2016 and one in early 2021 during the switch from SSC to ACX.

https://readscottalexander.com/posts/acx-your-review-the-astral-codex-ten