You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

RobbBB comments on Request: Sequences book reading group - Less Wrong Discussion

20 Post author: iarwain1 22 February 2015 01:06AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (31)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RobbBB 23 February 2015 04:15:08AM 5 points [-]

If you split up some of the longer articles, you might be able to get it to exactly 365 days of blog posts. :)

The eBook will be organized into 26 sequences, all of similar length; so if you want to start new discussion threads, perhaps you should do one thread per sequence rather than one per blog post.

Comment author: ciphergoth 23 February 2015 11:31:28AM 1 point [-]

We should totally try this before doing sequence reruns - do a discussion group on, say, a sequence a week.

Comment author: iarwain1 23 February 2015 05:41:47PM *  4 points [-]

26 sequences one every other week is precisely 52 weeks = the number of weeks in a year. Not bad.

Assuming there are about 300 articles total, that comes out to about 11 or 12 articles per sequence on average, which at one every other week is a little less than once per day.

I think I'd still prefer an article per day (or every other day, as per earlier poll), but I'll let others weigh in on this. Should I do yet another poll?

Comment author: ciphergoth 24 February 2015 12:22:19PM 2 points [-]

I'd sooner go for one a week; I think that's closer to the likely reading pace and it means we quickly find out whether it works. We could easily follow it with an article-a-day presentation if that's what we think is best after learning from the sequence-a-week presentation.

Comment author: TsviBT 25 February 2015 01:16:36AM 1 point [-]

FYI, each sequence is (very roughly) 20,000 words.

Comment author: ciphergoth 25 February 2015 08:49:58AM 1 point [-]

Assuming it is slower to read than the standard 200 wpm, that's still only a couple of hours each; seems doable!

Comment author: iarwain1 01 March 2015 05:01:09PM *  0 points [-]

Poll:

Submitting...