Notes for future OT posters:
1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.
2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)
3. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.
4. Unflag the two options "Notify me of new top level comments on this article" and "
Okay, so I recently made this joke about future Wikipedia article about Less Wrong:
A few days later I actually looked at the Wikipedia article about Less Wrong:
Well... technically, the article admit that at least Yudkowsky considers the basilisk stupid, and disagrees with neoreaction. Connotationally, it suggests that basilisk and neoreaction are 50% of what is worth mentioning about LW, because that's the fraction of the article these topics got.
Oh, and David Gerard is actively editing this page. Why am I so completely unsurprised? His contributions include:
...in summary, removing or shortening mentions of cognitive biases and effective altruism, and adding or developing mentions of basilisk and neoreaction.
Sigh.
EDIT: So, looking back at my prediction that...
...I'd say I was (1) right about the basilisk; (2) partially right about the white supremacism, which at this moment is not mentioned explicitly (yet! growth mindset), but the article says that the userbase is mostly white and male, and discusses eugenics; and (3) wrong about the computer games. 50% success rate!
Yikes. The current version of the WP article is a lot less balanced than the RW one!
Also, the edit warring is two way...someone wholesale deleted the Rs B section.