= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Gunnar_Zarncke comments on Stupid Questions (10/27/2014) - 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 (260)
Meta: I didn't read this thread for some time and only later got back to it (when I ran out of comments :-). On reflection I think it is due to the negative connotations with 'stupid'. We can hope that everyone here is immune to the halo effect. Or we can look for a better title.
'Simple questions'
'Quick questions' (implies urgency)
'Naive questions' (still connotations but not so strong ones)
'Less available Answers' (putting the idea on its head)
The reason for calling it stupid questions is to reassure people that they won't lose reputation or be insulted for asking questions that might be obvious to other people.
OK. I understand that. Makes sense. The simple/quick questions presumably go to the open thread. But the approach still reduced the number of readers of these questions.
Maybe, but previous iterations of this thread have gotten hundreds of comments so I don't think it's a big deal.
For being Respectable, I liked the older thread's title 'Procedural Knowledge Gaps' (1) (2). That is a narrower topic, though (but it's the topic I'm reading this thread for anyway).