Astral Codex Ten

ACX Commentariat

11 min read

ACX Commentariat

Article

ACX Commentariat is a recurring organization in the Astral Codex Ten archive, appearing 2 times across 2 issues between June 03, 2025 and July 26, 2025. The archive places it in contexts such as “The ACX Commentariat”; “the ACX Commentariat is not very toxic to begin with”; “I value the ACX Commentariat as providing a unique culture of lively, frank and polite discussion”. It most often appears alongside 4chan, ACX, ACX.

Metadata

  • Category: Organizations
  • Mention count: 2
  • Issue count: 2
  • First seen: June 03, 2025
  • Last seen: July 26, 2025

Appears In

Source Context

Recovered passages from the original issue text. When the raw archive preserved outbound links inside the source passage, they are listed directly under the quote.

Choose Nonbook Review Finalists 2025
June 03, 2025 · Original source
...ific Peer Review Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Technical Info Sign-Tracking Sucks State Of Competitive Debating (Unions) Address Synanthropes Tenga Arte Drape Testosterone The ACX Commentariat The Delusion Of Infinite Economic Growth The Drum Major Instinct The Emperor Of All Maladies The Internet That Might Have Been The Life's Work Of Banerjee, Duflo, and Kr...
...Peer Review Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Technical Info Sign-Tracking Sucks State Of Competitive Debating (Unions) Address Synanthropes Tenga Arte Drape Testosterone The ACX Commentariat The Delusion Of Infinite Economic Growth The Drum Major Instinct The Emperor Of All Maladies The Internet That Might Have Been The Life's Work Of Banerjee, Duflo, and Kr...
...ientific Peer Review Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Technical Info Sign-Tracking Sucks State Of Competitive Debating (Unions) Address Synanthropes Tenga Arte Drape Testosterone The ACX Commentariat The Delusion Of Infinite Economic Growth The Drum Major Instinct The Emperor Of All Maladies The Internet That Might Have Been The Life's Work Of Banerjee, Duflo, and Kr...
Your Review: The Astral Codex Ten Commentariat (“Why Do We Suck?”)
July 26, 2025 · Original source
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.
“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. Setting Out the Case for Decline There’s a pretty basic question that needs to be answered before we compare the Commentariat today to that of yesteryear. That question is - does ‘the Commentariat’ actually exist? It is easy to understand what it means for Scott’s writing to have got better or worse over time, or to track the evolution of a specific commentor’s engagement with the blog. But in order to review ‘the Commentariat’ as a whole we would have to treat it as a single entity with discernible patterns and tendencies. I believe this approach is justified; the Commentariat has a distinct culture, voice and its own unique animal spirits that react to both Scott’s interests and the interests of the external world. Since it is not just generating random noise, it is possible to explore the Commentariat over time to build a case that its overall quality is declining (or not). To demonstrate this, I have displayed below a graph of comments per post across the lifetime of the blogs. It may not be quite fair to say that ‘engagement’ is the same thing as ‘quality’, but I certainly think it raises a question that needs to be answered; something massively affects comment engagement in 2016 and then again in 2021. In this graph, each datapoint represents a month that Scott has been blogging. A typical month will have between 15-20 posts, of which around half will be authored by Scott and half will be ‘authored’ in some way by the Commentariat, which are mostly Open Threads. I’ve averaged by month because certain types of post get much less engagement than others, and so looking at individual posts ended up too noisy to make attractive graphs (the true goal of any honest statistician). The SSC-era is highlighted in blue. You can see that it shows something a bit like a classic sigmoidal adoption curve (but wearing a top hat). Post engagement starts low, before rapidly shooting up in 2014-15. It peaks in April 2016 – which is highlighted in red in this and all subsequent graphs so you can track peak engagement - before dropping back to a steady level of around 400-600 comments per post for the next three years. Notably, the run of posts that most people regard as being the ‘Golden Age’ for Scott’s writing happens much earlier than peak engagement with the comments section. People disagree about where this run of exceptionally good posts in quick succession start and ends, but I think you could safely say it has definitely begun by the time of The Control Group is Out of Control (although I would date it a little earlier, personally) and ends with either The Toxoplasmosa of Rage or Untitled – basically 2014 has a high density of ‘important’ posts.
Inline links: writes, writes, this one, https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!04Ny!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F67ab1e15-6e36-4500-8980-ad652af543c6_745x421.png, The Control Group is Out of Control, Toxoplasmosa of Rage, Untitled
The ACX-era begins in 2021 and is highlighted in green. You can see engagement starts lower than the SSC steady-state of 400-600 comments per post (maybe more like 300-400 per post) but increases over time to at least that level by 2024, getting close to the peak engagement era. In one of life’s small ironies, Scott wrote Why Do I Suck? at close to the lowest period of engagement the blog had experienced for nearly a decade. My key conclusion is that someone who says they preferred what the comments section used to be like is not (necessarily) just being curmudgeonly – something really did happen between pre-2016 SSC and post-2016 SSC, and then again between SSC as a whole and ACX as a whole, which caused a lot of people to disengage from the comments section. Furthermore, we would expect engagement to track quality quite closely (because people don’t want to engage with a bad comment section), and so a very strong hypothesis for an otherwise unexplained drop in comment engagement is a corresponding drop in Commentariat quality. Interestingly, after a few years of lower engagement than steady-state SSC, engagement with ACX is trending upwards at the moment. If you were optimistic, you might even say that the early signs are that 2025 is showing the first bit of the fast-growth section of a sigmoidal adoption curve. If this initial trend continues, the ACX Commentariat will surpass the peak of SSC Commentariat around lunchtime on the 27th July this year, so mark that in your calendars. Commentariat Quality – A Deep Dive ‘Professional’ reviewers – a thousand curses heaped upon their name – often rely on vague and idiosyncratic measures of quality. This may be appropriate for trivialities like literature and music, but when it comes to important things like the ACX Commentariat I’d prefer to follow good Commentariat norms and use clearly defined objective criteria in my review. I’ve therefore broken down comment quality into four key factors that, in my view, define the Commentariat’s unique character: Depth of engagement with a topic – When the comment section is good, it is characterised by people taking time to uncover each other’s views and identify genuine disagreement, rather than just rehearsing tribally-coded talking points or making incendiary ‘drive-by’ comments and disappearing.