= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on What bothers you about Less Wrong? - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (160)
OK. (FWIW, I upvoted that when you posted it and thought it was a very nifty post that drew out the implications of something I thought I understood already.)
So what does this imply? Are said implications a problem? How would one fix said problems?
I suppose the main implication is that the readers I was targeting make up a smaller proportion of the LW readership than I had realized.
Perhaps the only "fix" is for me to update my estimate of the relative size and influence of "my" audience within the general LW population, so as to better predict reaction to my posts.
(Thanks for the positive feedback, by the way.)
Those are good conclusions.
I would have added that it'd be a good idea to be clear about who your audience is and how you can target them. This avoids alienating the 'experts', who can see the disclaimers' avowed target group, reason they are not in it and either stop reading or read it as an example of pedagogy.
You can also try to target advanced outsiders by submitting to places like Hacker News or Reddit, something which has worked fairly well for my own 'beginner' pieces.