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.

Viliam comments on Open Thread, Apr. 06 - Apr. 12, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: philh 06 April 2015 02:18PM

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

Comments (128)

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

Comment author: Viliam 09 April 2015 03:20:26PM *  3 points [-]

That of course depends on how much that "other existing forum software" is complicated, and how many features need to be changed to fit our needs.

To answer your question, it is not "obviously better"; you just have to make a probabilistic estimate. Sometime people make the mistake of reinventing the wheel, when a good (or even superior) version already exists. But sometimes also people spend a lot of time investigating existing options, only to find out that all of them have some major problem. (And this process can also cost a lot of time, and when it fails, you are left empty-handed at the end.) I have seen both of these situations in real life. The "don't reinvent the wheel" part gets very popular on internet, but people underestimate that even when a solution is already available, it can take a lot of time to learn how to use it properly (that means, not just use the software as an ordinary user, but also as an administrator, and even to be able to customize it; those are an order of magnitude more complex tasks).

I guess a reasonable first step would be to set a deadline, for example a month or two, to explore the existing alternatives. (But you have to set a deadline, because there will always be yet another obscure alternative you have not thoroughly examined yet.) Maybe a month would be enough, if we consider the fact that LW already runs for a few years and it was not replaced by an existing superior alternative.