= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Konkvistador comments on Dealing with trolling and the signal to noise ratio - 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 (231)
Wiki
We would benefit from more and better wiki articles since they seem the best way to compress information that is often scattered across several articles and dozens of comments. This should help us maintain our level of discussion by making it easier to bring users up to speed on topics.
I used to think the most straigthforward fix would be:
Eliminate the trivial inconvenience of creating a separate count for the wiki. Lets just make it so you use your LW log in. Also perhaps limit edits to people with more than 100 karma, since I hear they had some problems with spamming.
Let people up and down vote edits. Let karma whoring work for us!
But when talking about this on IRC with gwern and he thought it probably wouldn't do much good and isn't worth the effort to implement. What do fellow rationalist think might be a good way to encourage more quantity and quality in the wiki?
If we're seriously having troll issues, then wiki + trolls = edit wars. Also polarization over schools of editing styles, the way Wikipedia has its Deletionists.
I think we have much more problems with the signal to noise ratio than trolls.
I'm not saying this is wrong, in fact I haven't yet seen significant evidence of either problem and was about to ask. But I hadn't gone looking for evidence either.
If most of the topics will generate disagreement, growing a wiki make this site less dynamic. Or maybe is fine to change(or improve) definitions all the time.