= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jsalvatier comments on Brainstorming: neat stuff we could do on LessWrong - 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 (27)
Reposting old posts. Reposting classic LW posts among the new posts (either in the discussion section or on the main page) can make them more accessible and can serve as a focal point for discussion. It can help introduce new readers to important background material, fill in some gaps for people who have been around LW for awhile but haven't read everything, and refresh the minds of oldtimers who read the post long ago. The sequences are an important part of LW, and along with frequent suggestions to read the sequences and other efforts, reposting can help get people to read them.
One option: repost individual posts. It could be one of your favorites, or any old post that you consider relevant or want to discuss. Just make a post in the discussion section with a link to the old post plus an explanation of why you reposted it. The explanation could just be a sentence saying that it's great post about X, or you could give a longer commentary on the post. Further discussion can take place in the comments to your post.
Option two: Cycle through the sequences. Start with the first post in the first sequence and repost one post per day in the discussion section. Each repost would contain a link to the original post, a link to the previous & subsequent posts in the sequence, and a one paragraph summary of the post (which could be copied directly from the wiki). Any additional comments or discussion would take place in the comments to the new post.
We could do either one of these options or both of them, or try another variation on the idea of reposting old posts. If we pin down some details, like a standardized format for the title & tags to indicate that it's a repost, we could turn this into a convention that's helpful for people who want to reread classic posts and easy to ignore for people who don't.
Decent idea that's been brought up various times in different contexts. I think doing this right would mean not actually copying the posts, but rather rexposing them (rss feed and being on top on some page). The old comments are still useful and having multiple copies of the same data floating around is always a bad idea.
By "repost" I didn't mean that we would copy the old post. I was thinking that someone would make a new post which contains a link to the old post and a paragraph or so about the old post (either a summary or an explanation of why it's worth reading).
There are other ways to give old posts more exposure, but this suggestion is a simple, low-tech approach which we could start doing right now if we wanted to. We just need to decide if we want to do it, and agree on conventions for those posts (title, tags, how often, whether comments should go on the original post or the new post, etc.).