Bugmaster comments on Who owns LessWrong? - Less Wrong

6 Post author: PhilGoetz 29 September 2011 04:22PM

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

Comments (83)

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

Comment author: jimrandomh 29 September 2011 09:04:53PM 24 points [-]

As far as I know, this is the first edit-fight between humans to take place on the LW wiki, and no procedure for resolving edit-fights is currently in place. I don't think framing this is a matter of ownership is quite right; we'd be having approximately the same discussion no matter who did the edit and reversion. It's worth noting that Wikipedia has been struggling with this issue for its entire lifetime, and ended up with a situation that people seem mostly unhappy with.

The best outcome would be for some neutral writer to step in, receive support from both of you, and then adjust the article to accurately reflect the consensus(es) and controversy(ies), in that order.

As for the object-level discussion about group selection, I think it's fairly obvious that group selection does happen sometimes, but there should be a very strong prior against attributing any particular trait to it.

Comment author: Bugmaster 30 September 2011 08:27:20PM 6 points [-]

As far as I know, this is the first edit-fight between humans to take place on the LW wiki...

This is somewhat off-topic, but have there been edit-fights between non-human agents on the LW Wiki ? ... Because that sounds kind of awesome. :-)

Comment author: jimrandomh 30 September 2011 08:29:58PM 11 points [-]

There have been edit fights with humans on one side and automated spamming on the other. In those cases, there's no dispute about who's right.

Comment author: MarkusRamikin 02 October 2011 08:18:09AM 3 points [-]

Of course. Right = on our side. ;)

Comment author: Bugmaster 30 September 2011 09:14:24PM 0 points [-]

Aw... ok that makes more sense than any of the things that I was thinking. Oh well.