thomblake comments on lessmeta - Less Wrong

6 Post author: PlaidX 22 December 2009 05:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (30)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Alicorn 22 December 2009 06:27:47PM 6 points [-]

This reminds me of the prospect of rationalist arbitration that was brought up a while ago. I like the idea of a place where above-averagely rational folks congregate for purposes that aren't related exclusively to the pursuit of ever-greater rationality. However, Less Wrong's only barrier to entry (in the comments, at any rate, which I find comprise about 60% of the site's value) is obscurity and esotericism. Anybody can make an account and post comments (if they suck, they become invisible to people with certain preference settings, but that doesn't prevent further posting). Our high signal to noise ratio comes about because people who spout noise mostly have no interest in us; if we start a sister site where we talk about D&D and kittens and how to get cranberry juice out of upholstery, where's the wall around our garden?

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 December 2009 06:30:42PM 6 points [-]

If that genuinely became a problem, we could require people to solve a simple Bayesian problem before registering.

Comment author: thomblake 23 December 2009 03:29:01PM 2 points [-]

I agree with Alicorn. Unless you want an echo chamber, math problems seem like a bad filter. Diversity is valuable.

Comment author: komponisto 23 December 2009 03:50:13PM 0 points [-]

You don't think there is diversity of thought among trained mathematicians?