= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on Open thread, Dec. 1 - Dec. 7, 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 (346)
Why would it be a pollutant in the LW ecosystem? This sounds pretty central in the space of things LW people are interested in; what am I missing? (Are you concerned that it would be too elementary for LW? that it might be full of mistakes and annoy or mislead people? that its topic isn't of interest to LW readers? ...)
What's the intended audience? What's it for? (Introducing ideas to people who don't know them? Cutting-edge research? Thinking aloud to get your ideas in order? ...)
I feel like it increases barrier to entry for new people.
Intended audience is me from three years ago, I guess cutting-edge-adjacent.
Barrier to entry shouldn't be your main criteria. High quality posts draw intelligent people.
Nah. Both Discussion and Main fairly consistently have a mix of intimidating technicality, fun (e.g., "Rationality Quotes"), lifehackery, ethics, random discussion, etc., etc., etc. One more bit of intimidating technicality isn't going to scare anyone away who wasn't going to be scared away anyhow.
Sounds like fun. Go for it, say I.
(Important note: I have not done anything remotely resembling research into the thought processes of potential new LW readers, and my model of them may be badly wrong. Don't trust the above much. It's just one random person's opinion.)