thescoundrel comments on Our Phyg Is Not Exclusive Enough - Less Wrong

25 [deleted] 14 April 2012 09:08PM

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

Comments (513)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: thescoundrel 15 April 2012 01:42:01AM 7 points [-]

Reading the comments, it feels like the biggest concern is not chasing away the initiates to our phyg. Perhaps tiered sections, where demonstrable knowledge in the last section gains you access to higher levels of signal to noise ratio? Certainly would make our phyg resemble another well known phyg.

Comment author: [deleted] 15 April 2012 01:55:36AM 9 points [-]

Maybe we should charge thousands of dollars for access to the sequences as well? And hire some lawyers...

More seriously, I wonder what people's reaction would be to a newbie section that wouldn't be as harsh as the now-much-harsher normal discussion. This seems to go over well on the rest of the internet.

Sort of like raising the price and then having a sale...

Comment author: Bugmaster 15 April 2012 08:42:52AM 3 points [-]

This sounds like a good idea, but I think it might be too difficult to implement in practice, as determined users will bend their efforts toward guessing the password in order to gain access to the coveted Inner Circle. This isn't a problem for that other phyg, because their access is gated by money, not understanding.

Comment author: thescoundrel 15 April 2012 09:59:01AM 1 point [-]

I think the freemasons have this one solved for us: instead of a passwords, we use interview systems, where people of the level above have to agree that you are ready before you are invited to the next level. Likewise, we make it known that helpful input on the lower levels is one of the prerequisites to gaining a higher level- we incentivise constructive input on the lower tiers, and effectively gate access to the higher tiers.

Comment author: Bugmaster 15 April 2012 10:08:07AM 7 points [-]

Why does this solution need to be so global ? Why don't we simply allow users to blacklist/whitelist other users as they see fit, on an individual basis ? This way, if someone wants to form an ultra-elite cabal, they can do that without disturbing the rest of the site for anyone else.

Comment author: Alsadius 15 April 2012 08:09:28PM 2 points [-]

So, who is going to sit on the interview committee to control access to a webforum? You're asking more of the community than it will ever give you, because what you advocate is an absurd waste of time for any actual person.

Comment author: hesperidia 17 April 2012 07:08:46AM 3 points [-]

The SCP Foundation creepypasta wiki used to use a very complex application system, designed to weed out those with insufficient writing skill. It turned away a fairly significant number of potential writers due to its sheer size. It was also maintained through Google Docs by one dedicated admin for several years. I'm not sure anyone here would give up their free time to maintaining bureaucracy rather than winning, and it seems counterproductive to me, but it's theoretically possible that it can be kept to a part-time job.

Comment author: thescoundrel 15 April 2012 08:34:56PM 0 points [-]

That's possible- it may be that the cost of doing this effectively is not worth the gain, or that there is a less intensive way to solve this issue. However, I think there could be benefits to a tiered structure- perhaps even have the levels be read only for those not there yet- so everyone can read the high signal to noise, but we still make sure the protect it. I do know there is much evidence to suggest the prestige among even small groups is enough to motivate people to do things that normally would be considered an absurd waste of time.

Comment author: Percent_Carbon 15 April 2012 10:26:49AM 2 points [-]

You're not proposing a different system, you're just proposing additional qualifiers.

Comment author: TrE 15 April 2012 07:02:17AM 1 point [-]

Sounds like a good idea, would be an incentive for reading and understanding the sequences to many people and could raise the quality level in the higher 'levels' considerably. There are also downsides: We might look more phyg-ish to newbies, discussion quality at the lower levels could fall rapidly (honestly, who wants to debate about 'free will' with newbies when they could be having discussions about more interesting and challenging topics?) and, well, if an intelligent and well-informed outsider has to say something important about a topic, they won't be able to.

For this to be implemented, we'd need a user rights system with the respective discussion sections as well as a way to determine the 'level' of members. Quizzes with questions randomly drawn from a large pool of questions with a limited number of tries per time period could do well, especially if you don't give any feedback about the scoring other than 'you leveled up!' and 'Your score wasn't good enough, re-read these sequences:__ and try again later.'

And, of course, we need the consent of many members and our phyg-leaders as well as someone to actually implement it.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 17 April 2012 08:31:14AM 1 point [-]

Instead of setting up gatekeepers, why not let people sort themselves first?

No one wants to be a bozo. We have different interests and aptitudes. Set up separate forums to talk about the major sequences, so there's some subset of the sequences you could read to get started.

I'd suggest too that as wonderful as EY is, he is not the fount of all wisdom. Instead of focusing on getting people to shut up, how about focusing on getting people to add good ideas that aren't already here?

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 15 April 2012 12:15:40PM 0 points [-]

Perhaps tiered sections, where demonstrable knowledge in the last section gains you access to higher levels of signal to noise ratio? Certainly would make our phyg resemble another well known phyg.

Depending on other factors, it could also resemble a school system.