ata comments on Open Thread: April 2010, Part 2 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Unnamed 08 April 2010 03:09AM

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

Comments (194)

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

Comment author: Nevin 18 April 2010 06:06:39AM *  4 points [-]

The map image in the masthead confused me when I found LW, and might reduce the probability that casual Web-browsing would-be-rationalists would take the time to understand what LW actually is before moving on.

I'm new to the community; this post may not be structured like the ones you're used to. Bear with me.

If LW is anything like the few sites whose analytics numbers I've seen, a significant portion of traffic comes from Web searches (I would wildly guess 10-30% of their pageviews). According to the analytics I've seen on my own site, out of those landings from Google et. al., many are likely to stay only for a few seconds, presumably trying to see if they've found what they're looking for.

[In my opinion] the name, small grey welcome box for new readers, and the tagline under the logo collectively do a good job of explaining what LW is, even for people who aren't familiar with any related terminology or concepts. The image of a map in the background, [in my opinion], does not. When I first arrived I thought for a few moments it was a site about maps. I ended up reading enough to stick around, but I wonder if some don't.

I would like to ask people who didn't understand what the site was about and didn't return to LW if the image was the reason... but we'll never hear from them. So instead, I invite people here to chime in about whether or not the image deterred them at first, and whether it is something worth re-thinking.

[Whether this potential deterrent is bad is a separate question; I'm just curious about whether it even is a deterrent. I can see arguments for trying to deter people (or certain types of people) intentionally, but I suppose that's irrelevant if the image doesn't affect the probability that first-time readers will return.]

Comment author: ata 18 April 2010 07:30:23AM *  1 point [-]

It didn't deter me, but I didn't get it until someone explained it just recently. For a while, I was just thinking "What's that a map of? Is that where FHI is based? Is it the area in Santa Clara surrounding the SIAI House? Whatever it's a map of, is is relevant enough to put it at the top of every page?" (Actual answer from a minute googling street names: it's in San Francisco, but I don't know if there's any reason this particular location was chosen.)

O'course, even for those who get it, it may not be the best illustration of the map/territory distinction, because the lower half isn't the territory either. It's just a more detailed map than the top half. Ceci n'est pas le territoire!

Anyway, I doubt it will actively deter many people, but there are probably better possibilities.

Comment author: ata 18 April 2010 07:36:41AM 2 points [-]

Actually, regarding "Ceci n'est pas...", The Treachery of Images is a pretty good illustration of the map/territory distinction. But it probably wouldn't make a great masthead.