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.

ReevesAnd comments on Ideas to Improve LessWrong - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: adamzerner 25 May 2015 10:55PM

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

Comments (30)

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

Comment author: Vaniver 25 May 2015 11:57:04PM 6 points [-]

A way to discuss ideas for the site, vote on them, and incentivize the generation of good ideas. I sense that having this would be huge. a) I sense that there are a lot of good ideas out there in people's heads but that they haven't shared. b) I sense that by discussing things, there could be a lot of refinement of current ideas, and a lot of generation of new ideas.

By ideas for the site, do you mean changes for the site code? And if you mean changes to the code, do you mean the change ideas, or the change implementations?

The backend is open source, and posts were made in 2011 and 2012 on how to make modifications to the code so that users could submit improvements. I don't pay close attention, but my impression is that very few, if any, improvements have been submitted by users.

Issues can be reported (i.e. requests made) at the Google Code page. But resources to implement those changes are minimal, as I understand it.


It seems to me that the primary piece missing is the effort. Either volunteers need to familiarize themselves with the codebase and then make changes, or volunteers need to put up enough cash to hire devs to make changes. (Presumably the folks at Trike Apps, who would need to approve those changes anyway.)

A way for people to assign monetary value to requests ("I would pay $20 for five separate subreddits") and aggregate those pledges into prizes would perhaps be interesting and solve some of the core problems (while causing other, hopefully more minor, problems). Either it's clear that something is worth doing, it gets done, and the doer is rewarded, or it's clear that something is not worth doing, and it remains deliberately undone.

Comment author: ReevesAnd 26 May 2015 02:39:43PM 4 points [-]

If we have a way to actually implement improvements to the site, I'd be interested in learning how to do so. I have some development experience. Monetary rewards could certainly motivate me to do so (get me to do it sooner), but I'll probably start researching and working anyway.

As adamzerner asked in another comment, will my contributions actually make it to the site? I need to do more research.