= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Upcoming LW Changes - 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 (105)
That doesn't look terribly transparent to me.
It'd still be a massive improvement on what we have now and I assume that'd discuss interesting submissions
It looks to me like there's a progression from "no input or explanation" to "explanation but no input" to "input and explanation." I'd say something is still transparent in the second case, but oftentimes what people are really interested in is input. (Me talking at you more isn't as helpful as me listening to you more!)
Well, assuming the existence of some High Council, the transparency ranking would go like this:
You see a witch being burned at the stake. You assume the High Council ordered this.
The High Council proclaims "Let the witch be burned!".
The High Council proclaims "Let the witch be burned for she consorted with Clippy!".
The High Council proclaims "Let the witch be burned for reasons A, B, and C which we deem more important then the mitigating circumstances X and Y."
The High Council proclaims "Let the witch be burned, and, by the way, here are the minutes of the meeting where we decided she is to be burned."
The High Council proclaims "Behold the witch! We will now debate in public whether she ought to be burned. What makes you think she is a witch?" A LessWronger: "She turned me into a newt!" The public: "A newt?!" The Lesswronger: "I got better".