= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Brillyant comments on Open Thread March 28 - April 3 , 2016 - 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 (69)
Would you say there's an implicit norm in LW Discussion of not posting links to private LessWrong diaspora or rationalist-adjacent blogs?
I feel like if I started posting links to every new and/or relevant SSC or Ribbonfarm post as top-level Discussion topics, I would get downvoted pretty bad. But I think using LW Discussion as a sort of LW Diaspora Link Aggregator would be one of the best ways to "save" it.
One of the lessons of the diaspora is that lots of people want to say and discuss sort-of-rationalist-y things or at least discuss mundane or political topics in a sort-of-rationalist-y way. As far as I can tell, in order to actually find what all these rationalist-adjacent people are saying, you would have to read like twenty different blogs.
I personally wouldn't mind a more Hacker News style for LW Discussion, with a heavy focus on links to outside content. Because frankly, we're not generating enough content locally anymore.
I'm essentially just floating this idea for now. If it's positively received, I might take it upon myself to start posting links.
It seems to me, despite talk of change, LW is staying essentially the same... and thereby struggling at an accelerating rate to be a place for useful content.
My current modus operandi for LW is to use the LW favorite I have in place to (1) Check SSC and the other "Rationality Blogs" on the side bar, and then (2) peruse discussion (and sometimes comment) if there isn't a new post at SSC, et al that commands my attention. I wonder if other LWers do the same? I wonder what percentage of LW traffic is "secondary" in a way similar to what I've described?
I like your suggestion because it is a radical change that might work. And it's bad to do nothing if what you are doing seems to be on a trajectory of death.
At some point, during a "how can we make LW better" post on here, I mentioned making LW a de facto "hub" for the rationality blogosphere since it's increasingly not anything else. I'm now re-saying that and seconding your idea. There could still be original content... but there is nowhere close to enough original content coming in right now to justify LW as a standalone site.
As a a data point, this is exactly how I've been using LessWrong for at least the last year. One of the reasons I more frequently comment in open threads is because we can have less idle conversations like this one as well :P
I first check the "rationality blogs", and then the "Discussion".