Over the last year, VincentYu, gwern and others have provided many papers for the LessWrong community (87% success rate in 2012) through previous help desk threads. We originally intended to provide editing, research and general troubleshooting help, but article downloads are by far the most requested service.
If you're doing a LessWrong relevant project we want to help you. If you need help accessing a journal article or academic book chapter, we can get it for you. If you need some research or writing help, we can help there too.
Turnaround times for articles published in the last 20 years or so is usually less than a day. Older articles often take a couple days.
Please make new article requests in the comment section of this thread.
If you would like to help out with finding papers, please monitor this thread for requests. If you want to monitor via RSS like I do, many RSS readers will give you the comment feed if you give it the URL for this thread (or use this link directly).
If you have some special skills you want to volunteer, mention them in the comment section.
I guess "relevant" depends on what kind of help you want. If you just want a journal article that someone can download in under a minute "relevant" is going to be fairly broad. If you want someone's help proofreading a paper you wrote, the definition is going to me more narrow as that requires more work.
Just model the people on Lesswrong in your mind and ask: "Do I think they would want to help here?" If the issue is relevant in a way that would embarrass you, you are probably good enough at modelling this community to avoid asking.
As asking is generally quite low cost, it's not the end of the world if you do write a request that on the edge of being relevant and nobody wants to help.
Surely you mean "irrelevant in a way that would embarrass you"? If it's embarrassing but relevant wouldn't it be advisable to a) suck it up or b) PM someone or post under a sockpuppet or whatever, if it's really that bad?