Comment author: Eneasz 27 April 2011 04:06:38PM 6 points [-]

When you receive a reply to a comment, you get a notification. But when someone posts a comment on a top-level or discussion post you made, you get no notification. It would be nice if you could at least choose whether or not you'd be notified when someone posts a new comment on a top-level post you created, I usually stop checking mine after a week.

Comment author: childofbaud 28 April 2011 03:34:39AM *  0 points [-]

This issue was indirectly addressed before by Emile, and commented on specifically in a reply to the previous by jwhendy. But it's probably an important enough usability problem to warrant its own top-level comment.

Currently the parent should have at least +6 extra upvotes going by that second link, possibly more, assuming the same people didn't upvote both. (I rescinded my vote from before, and I am now upvoting this.)

Comment author: childofbaud 27 April 2011 06:07:17AM *  8 points [-]

Provide optional notification of nested comment replies to the parent comment's author (beyond the initial reply).

Currently, if there is a reply to one of my comments, I receive a notice. However, if there is a reply to the reply, and so on, I don't. These grandchildren replies are often still relevant and of interest to me, however. Having the option of being notified of them would be nice.

(Alternately, this suggestion would solve the problem also, though that solution would require an additional step from the author.)

Comment author: Alicorn 24 April 2011 05:27:07PM 0 points [-]

This appears to be implemented, although I don't know the markup for it.

Comment author: childofbaud 27 April 2011 05:57:29AM 2 points [-]

Ability to disable images in comments.

Comment author: thomblake 26 April 2011 02:46:00PM 10 points [-]

This relates to something I've been arguing hereabouts since before the founding of Less Wrong. Basically, if you reduce all of your decision-making to a mathematical algorithm, then you're limiting the power of your decision-making to those parts of your brain that can do math. But our brains can do amazing things if we let them, and are mostly not very good at math.

a good cognitive hazmat suit

I want one!

the traffic light shimmered silvery-blue, like an arc of liquid electricity creeping across the surface, and then returned to normal.

I would wonder if something like that actually happened - it might have been an unfamiliar trick of the light or electrical malfunction...

Once I was walking down the back of West Rock at twilight and suddenly noticed everything was done up in strange, bright colors - the rocks were teal and purple, the leaves were emerald green, etc. After several minutes, the experience didn't go away, and so I picked up a representative purple rock and brought it back to civilization, thinking that would dispel the clearly hallucinatory magic. I immediately asked a passerby, "What color is this rock?", to which the response was indeed "purple". I resolved thenceforth to pay a little more attention to my surroundings.

Comment author: childofbaud 27 April 2011 05:19:53AM *  0 points [-]

But our brains can do amazing things if we let them, and are mostly not very good at math.

I think math is the most amazing thing my brain can do. Granted, it's not very good at it, but I bet it can improve with practice.

Comment author: Giles 24 April 2011 11:35:24PM *  4 points [-]

"And the more fun we have the more people will want to join us. That last part is something I only realized was Really Important after visiting New York"

This suggests a strong "I don't do the people stuff" bias (HP:MOR24) which will be one of the many points I address in my upcoming epic "How to save the world" sequence.

Stay tuned on the LW discussion area for this. I think I'll lose a lot of friends here if I pollute the main LW board with my particular agenda ;-)

Downvote to -10 if I haven't written a discussion post along these lines in the next 2 weeks (have to sort out my taxes first - boohoo)

[EDIT: unless someone else beats me to the exact same post. But I guess that would be unlikely and funny enough to lose 10 clippies over]

Comment author: childofbaud 27 April 2011 05:15:18AM *  0 points [-]

I think I'll lose a lot of friends here if I pollute the main LW board with my particular agenda ;-)

If figuring out how to save the world is your agenda, then I suspect it is a more common one than you think around these parts. Looking forward to your post.

Comment author: Gray 11 April 2011 05:02:59AM 4 points [-]

Not a big fan of this. Seems like you could replace the word "think" with many different adjectives, and it would sound good or bad depending on whether I think the adjective agrees with what I consider my virtue. For instance, replace "think" with "exercise", and I would like if I'm a regular exerciser, but if I'm not I'd wonder why I would want to waste my life exercising.

Comment author: childofbaud 27 April 2011 04:56:59AM *  0 points [-]

Not a big fan of this. Seems like you could replace the word "think" with many different adjectives, and it would sound good or bad depending on whether I think the adjective agrees with what I consider my virtue. For instance, replace "think" with "exercise", and I would like if I'm a regular exerciser, but if I'm not I'd wonder why I would want to waste my life exercising.

The cognitive faculties are what makes humans distinct from other species, not any particular proclivity for exercise or any other such feats. A person refusing to think is like a fish refusing to swim.

Furthermore, we often benefit from these faculties even when pursuing interests that seem completely unrelated. Many of the best athletes are also decent thinkers. They have to be able to optimize their training regime, control their diets, cross the road, etc.

Comment author: steven0461 20 April 2011 09:07:18PM 0 points [-]

More subreddits, so that each post and comment is more likely to be seen and voted on by the sorts of people who would like to see it and who know whether it is good or bad than by other sorts of people.

Comment author: childofbaud 22 April 2011 06:17:04AM *  0 points [-]

One of my suggestions seems to be a subset of this one. So, whoever keeps track of these things might want to mentally add any upvotes that one gets to the parent, if they agree.

I think this would be a really neat addition, if done right. It would also lengthen the lifespan of some of the discussion threads, as they wouldn't constantly be pushed back by new, potentially irrelevant ones. (I, for one, rarely navigate beyond the first page, and there are only a few topics that I am interested in.)

This doesn't have to replace the main discussion area, by the way. It should be possible to implement viewing all the separate discussion topics on one page, but still provide the option of finer granularity for those who seek it.

Some additional, potential categories: LW Community Organizers (currently on a Google Group), Sequence Re-runs (currently strewn across the main discussion), Existential Risks, Radical Life Extension, AI Theory/Implementation, etc.

Comment author: waveman 20 April 2011 09:52:10PM 0 points [-]

Ability to have favourite users. Ability to give their posts and threads "personal karma". Similarly ability to killfile individuals, like you could in the old newsgroup days. (Or use "personal negative Karma").

Comment author: childofbaud 21 April 2011 04:59:02PM 3 points [-]

A kind of "favourite users" already exists, under the guise of "friends". (Click on PREFERENCES, then click FRIENDS on the re-rendered navigation bar.)

But it sounds like what you're suggesting is a more fine-grained personal ranking of posters. This could be useful, and it could be dangerous. It sounds like it could reinforce confirmation bias, for one.

Comment author: mstevens 21 April 2011 03:07:17PM 2 points [-]

I'd like to see the site move away from the blog frontend.

It should start with an overview of rationality, some articles, and maybe the blog for people who want to discuss things further.

Comment author: childofbaud 21 April 2011 04:38:10PM 3 points [-]

This might be good for newbies on their first visit, but if retention is the ultimate goal, it would quickly become redundant for the regulars to click through a static front page to get to the new content.

The ABOUT link under the header already serves the purpose you suggest.

Comment author: curiousepic 20 April 2011 07:25:34PM *  23 points [-]

I hope the aim will be to preserve the beautiful simplicity (and color scheme) of the current site. Honestly I don't think it needs a graphic redesign at all.

Comment author: childofbaud 21 April 2011 04:08:00PM 1 point [-]

Whatever graphic design changes are performed, users should be able to revert to something resembling the old layout.

View more: Prev | Next