= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
adamzerner comments on Ways to improve LessWrong - 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 (102)
A community wiki for each article that could serve as a summary/tldr.
Each article? That's an overkill. There are dozens of articles every week.
I would rather have the wiki only for... uhm... important articles. Yeah, hard to define what that means. It certainly doesn't mean "Main". It's more like: an article which generated good insights in the comments. (Those insights should be included in the summary.) In real life it could mean: an article for which someone (preferably other than its author) bothered to provide a summary.
And perhaps we don't need a page per article, but rather per topic. If there were three articles on the same topic, it would be nice to have those summaries together.
So, I guess I would approach this from the other side: The wiki pages should be topic-oriented, but they should include the summaries of the important relevant articles (and the most insightful comments thereof). So if you see a good article, first search whether a relevant topic already exists, and add the summary there; and if it doesn't, create the new wiki page, but for the topic, not for the article, so other people can add other articles there later. And of course PM the article author to add the wiki link to their article.
EDIT: To make collaboration on this process easier, we could once in a while have a Discussion thread of "nominate the articles you want to see summarized in the wiki".
To move one step further in the direction you indicate, I think wiki should summarize the topics of the articles, not the articles themselves. This is also how it's always been. So a thing to do with good articles (estimated by how useful it would be to recall their content in later discussions) is to make sure their useful content is summarized in appropriate wiki pages, and to link to the articles in their "Blog posts" sections.
(I'm not sure what adamzerner meant by linking to that quota page, so I'm not sure we are discussing the same question.)
More generally:
Summaries of the core sequences in easier to understand language.
1) This would make it more accessible to everyday people, and would be more persuasive to them.
2) It would be easier to understand for rationalists too. And would be good for quick references.