= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Others' predictions of your performance are usually more accurate - 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 (16)
Don't you mean "Others' predictions of your performance are usually more accurate"?
And your last paper and graph are rather well-known by now.
Ah, yes that's much better isn't it. Am I allowed to change this? Sorry for being such a flagrant newcomer; it seems like I really need to tighten up my language.
EDIT: I've given it some thought and I think it has something to do with being active on Reddit, where there's lots of incentive to sensationalize your posts. I will be mindful of this going forward.
Your concern for providing quality content is more valuable than any social hierarchy nonsense. Thanks for your contribution.
In general the standard is to edit to remove errors like that to the extend that the edit doesn't invalidate existing comments. Often simply posting: "Thanks for pointing out the error, I fixed it." allows any further reader to see that the the person pointing out an error was making a valid point while at the same time correcting the error.
I am unsure of the actual mechanics of doing that, but there are no prohibitions against edits.
It would probably be for the best :-) LW is full of people who are not above shredding sloppy language for minor amusement value (and, of course, to save the world).