= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
pianoforte611 comments on A Rationalist Guide to OkCupid - 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 (66)
Alright full disclosure - if you had just said "You should probably have included a "show me the answers" option", I would had agreed and moved on. But instead your tone of ~Bah, everything is ruined!~ I found quite jarring*, especially since I had already gained some useful and surprising information off of despite its limitations. This isn't a particularly scientific poll for many reasons, I don't know how to tease apart strategies that are popular with strategies that lead to long term success which is what the qualifier was for - if I figure out a way to do this some day, I'll be more careful in its implementation.
*I'm not sure why, this LessWrong after all.
I think that LW is about furthering high epistemic standards, especieally when it comes to applied rationality. Applied rationality is at least as important than the specific subject matter.
Additionally I think voicing this criticism this way increases the chances that people who read the criticising to future polls at higher standards.