Let me try to clarify what I mean.

Right now, as I'm writing this, someone coming across the LW home page would have some grounds to conclude that LW is advising:

• reading interesting books or articles with quotable material
• attending meetups
• introspective exercises on why we reject some actions
• watching your thoughts and words
• brainstorming exercises
• measuring your aversions
• writing (or maybe reading) horoscopes

(I'm omitting posts which appear to be purely informational.)

Over the course of the next few weeks, this list will change until new content has entirely replaced the old; at that point if you asked again the question "what is LW advising" you'd see something different, maybe with substantial overlap with the above list, maybe not.

So that is one procedure to (attempt to) determine what are LW's major themes of short-term advice.

My point is that different procedures may yield different results, for different readerships.

Cryonics comes up every so often, but may or may not be perceived as a major theme - depending on how you read LW.

ETA: if you're going to count all-time upvotes, then it would make more sense for me to do a systematic survey: rank all posts by number of upvotes, possibly normalize by how long ago the material has been posted (more recent material has had less time to accumulate upvotes), extract from each post what advice it gives if applicable. What seems to be going on for both you and the OP is that you rank as "major" the things that have struck you the most. They may have struck you the most precisely because they were most unconventional, in which case you will come to unsound conclusions.