= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Psy-Kosh comments on Open Thread: August 2009 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (188)
I was just thinking: this site is the result of splitting off from overcomingbias.com earlier this year. With its new format and functionality, comments and posts get ratings. But all of Eliezer Yudkowsky's posts from before the split don't have ratings comparable to more recent posts, because that would require people to go back through the old posts mod them up.
Some people have done so, but not enough that their ratings accurately compare with more recent top-level posts.
I suggest that everyone take the time to go back to the Eliezer_Yudkowsky top-level posts from before ~February '09, and vote up the ones you remember as being particularly good. If you wish, also mention what you voted on in this thread and why.
In order to avoid nudging anyone toward my picks, I'll wait a while and then say them.
If you need some help jogging your memory, here are some threads where people discussed highlights from when LW was overcomingbias.com: one, two, three.
That's not really needed, I think. Since a simple way to do that is to just notice which ones you tend to reference/search for most, and simply upvote as you happen to have need of them, right?
The purpose is to make the ratings of the old posts more comparable to the new ones, which can only happen when they get as much attention as new ones get, which requires a deliberate effort on the part of regular visitors to make sure their appreciation of older posts is reflected in an upvote.
And upvoting shouldn't have much to do with when you happen to have need of them. If you like a post and want to refer back to it, that's what the "save" feature is for. Or bookmark it.
Any reason I got -2 for this suggestion btw?
Dunno about the -2. I didn't vote you down. And I meant "those articles that I tend to reference most, that I tend to find most useful to link to to explain a concept are probably the ones most worth voting up"
But I guess for consistency, you may be right.