Yobi comments on Less Wrong NYC: Case Study of a Successful Rationalist Chapter - Less Wrong

137 Post author: Cosmos 17 March 2011 08:12PM

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

Comments (166)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 11 March 2012 11:31:33AM *  2 points [-]

Most progress is accomplished in small groups: There is strong consensus that group discussions rarely result in updating, even if they are fun. Conversations of 2 or 3 (maybe 4 at the most), seem to produce the most useful insights. This is why spending time together bilaterally is incredibly important to group development. When a handful of people are all interested in a particular topic and practice it together, they form a de facto working group which allows them to iterate rapidly and then teach it to the rest of the members.

This is important and oft-overlooked. Particularly for the more introverted sorts, smaller group = win. In my experience, large meetups (10, 20, or even more people) are a lot less satisfying than smaller groups. Perhaps four or five people is ideal.

Speaking broadly, there seems to be an inverse relationship between conversation quality and group size.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 28 July 2012 11:51:13PM 0 points [-]

Large meetups are okay, but having a single big conversation which gets hectic because people have to struggle to be heard, and gets you angry at the one inevitable loudmouth who doesn't realize he's dominating the conversation, is not very good.