Posts
Wikitag Contributions
It’s much easier for me not to say anything, but my model of Duncan would prefer for me to comment.
Overall strong upvote from me, but I’m not doing it because: what is up with the section about Zack Davis?? I’m not disputing the veracity here, because I don’t know. But it just doesn’t feel at all necessary or even useful to have it in this post. Just comes across as kind of petty. Kind if like writing The Inferno just so you can categorize and viscerally describe your enemies in hell.
I looked at your post:
- I don’t think I ever saw it on the front page. If I did, I don’t think the title would have made it seem worth reading.
- Reading the first few paragraphs: I’m not sure who this post is for, what problem is it addressing or why should I care in general. It’s referencing some specific chapter out of a book I never heard of.
It seems like a long post, so I just skip reading it.
I hope the suggestions are easy to derive from the above points.The writing is not amazing but I didn’t get LLM vibes.
I’d recommend Primer over this.
How do I opt into the LessWrong Watercolor Aesthetic?
Object for the stated reason.
1I have a personal rule that I tell people when they start bringing this energy into my life: “I’m happy to listen to you for 5 minutes a day on this topic. After that I’m out.”
I’m interested! But I live in Portugal, so it would need to be remote.
The former. I think you can just explain the blinds without explaining the entire poker game.
I like the idea and would consider doing something like that in the future. Thanks! FWIW, I found the explanation of poker completely extraneous to the main point.
If you would like to increase engagement with your posts, I’d highly recommend not posting all of them at once, especially because they’re long. Post the first one, see how people respond. Then adjust and post the second one next week.