= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Wei_Dai comments on Agree, Retort, or Ignore? A Post From the Future - 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 (84)
I think you need a proposal that is a lot clearer before it stands any substantial chance of becoming a social norm. Surely we can't expect every comment here (or anywhere) to end with a full explicit probability distribution over all related issues. Nor can we demand that everyone reply to any reply to them. So you need some easily implementable and verifiable standards on who is expected to reply to what, and who is supposed to summarize their opinions when on what. I'm not that optimistic about his approach, but I'll keep my mind open.
I forgot to ask, why are you not optimistic about this approach?
The ambiguities seem difficult to surmount. Conversation is a highly evolved system and random changes are usually for the worse.
What ambiguities are you referring to? My proposed norm seems quite clear, compared to other standard norms such as "don't flame or troll".
Online conversations, being recent invention, probably has lots of room for improvement.
Agreed, which why I try to suggest non-random changes. :)