= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Douglas_Knight comments on Which subreddits should we create on 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 (76)
There exist many "best of" lists, manual and algorithmic.
"Promoted" is a "best of" list; you probably just don't like the taste of the promoters (eg, meetups). The front page "featured" articles are best of the archives. Much of main is moved from discussion by the author in response to audience encouragement (but another part of main is going to be demoted to discussion). There is a list of top scoring articles of the week or month or other periods [1]. Hot is a smoothing of the trade-off between recency and votes, but the version for main is busted; anyhow, it doesn't let you control how recent you want the posts, the way "top" does.
[1] click on "filter" to choose another period.
These might be good substitutes in theory, but it's possible that they are not prominent enough on the site to be good practical substitutes, insomuch as people just don't know about them. That would probably be quickly and easily fixed by editing front page / sidebar HTML, but as it stands.
More generally, I (and I gather others) find LW somewhat kludgey, un- or outright counterintuitive, and time-consuming to familiarise oneself with. As such, responses like 'There's a workaround for that, you know' are not entirely satisfying.