= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Alicorn comments on Open Thread: February 2010, part 2 - 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 (857)
A related question: If I have a large topic to cover, should I cover it in one post, or split it up along convenient cleavage planes and make it a sequence? (If I make sequences, I think I'll learn my lesson from the last one I tried and write it all before posting anything, so I don't post 2/3 of it and then stop.)
I really like the "sequences" approach - it's easier to read and digest a chunk at a time, and it focusses discussion well, too.
Long posts are more offputting than short ones, and individual steps are more likely to be correct than entire theorems - both of these points would suggest posting sequences preferentially.
As for a specific reference on length: thirty-three hundred words sharply focused on a single, vivid subject is pushing the upper limit of what I find comfortable to attack in a single sitting.
Posting 2/3 of a sequence and stopping is fine if people turn out not to be interested. I recommend fast posting and fast feedback.