= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Stefan_Schubert comments on In favour of terseness - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (58)
True. Perhaps some posts should include separate "anticipation of objections" parts. These could be skipped by people who prefer terse posts but would have to be read by anyone who wishes to comment.
Or we could do the opposite pattern and try to have a high-level takeaway/summary that in theory could get you 80% of the value of reading the post in 20% of the time.
We could call it an "abstract"! Or a "tl;dr", for the younger generation.
Most LW posts don't have them, and they typically aren't comprehensive enough to get you 80% of the value of reading the entire post.
They can tell you whether a post is worth reading, and give the writer a target to aim at.