1) Writing only about successful projects improves the signal:noise ratio. However enthusiastic I feel about my game, if it fails, it is an evidence that it was not worth publishing.
Noticing how something failed is useful. You had some reason to think it would work and it didn't. If it was just a lark, sure, move on, but if you expected it to work, pause, notice you are confused and try to work out what happened. Maybe it's a calibration exercise, or maybe there's a patch.
Also, not everyone returns to give us updates. If you say it didn't work, we can all update more cleanly than if you go dark and we have to weight the update by how likely not letting us know what happened is caused by a negative result or just other commitments.
You are right; and so is gwern.
Therefore I promise to write about positive or negative results of this experiment in Group Rationality Diary in December 2012 (or sooner, in case of failure).
This is the public group instrumental rationality diary for the week of August 6th. It's a place to record and chat about it if you have done, or are actively doing, things like:
Or anything else interesting which you want to share, so that other people can think about it, and perhaps be inspired to take action themselves. Try to include enough details so that everyone can use each other's experiences to learn about what tends to work out, and what doesn't tend to work out.
Thanks to everyone who contributes!
Last week's diary; archive of prior diaries.
(Sorry for being late this week -- I'm on vacation and got distracted :-)