ciphergoth comments on What isn't the wiki for? - Less Wrong

8 Post author: ciphergoth 07 April 2009 10:36AM

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

Comments (25)

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

Comment author: ciphergoth 07 April 2009 03:57:08PM 1 point [-]

OK, let me come at it from another angle. How are we going to agree as an editing community on what should be in a list of what hasn't been written?

Comment author: AnnaSalamon 07 April 2009 05:21:19PM 1 point [-]

We could use NPOV if necessary. E.g., we could note that "many have expressed an interest in techniques for reducing akrasia, and in gaining a better understanding of akrasia", perhaps with links to the relevant LW comments. Similarly, we could note that "there has been much discussion of anthropics/Newcomb/whatever, and most commenters seem to agree on (a), (b), and (c), but there remains quite a bit of controversy on how to coherently conceptualize (d)"...

I think the basic technique for agreeing about what should be on a wiki, is just to summarize the spread of disagreement when significant disagreement occurs on a particular point.