I feel like this is equivocating between different types of quality in a way that makes the statement confusing?
I think there are a number of people who could make a thrown together bullet point list that would be very valuable. E.g. this “off the cuff thoughts” post from Carl is still maybe one of the best references on EA and systemic change to this day?
These posts might be “poor quality” in some senses (lots of grammar/spelling mistakes, unclear narrative, etc.) but “high-quality” in the sense of having important ideas.
I understand DAD to be encouraging this kind of post, which I would argue we need more of on the margin.
I agree that there have been some high-quality posts that are lacking in regard to polish (the same is true for any other dimension of quality). But will the average unpolished draft that you attract be good? Highly doubt it.
“Research debt” is only a problem if the community has the problem of feeling like they need to read everything/keep up with the literature in the first place. Well, mostly. Rather than limiting people’s willingness to communicate, should instead innovate on filtering higher-quality and lower-quality posts, for the dimensions you care about.
Alternatively/additionally, should split (self-sorted or not) into bubbles where newcomers feel safer to post, but still have an audience and a chance at prestige if they produce good work. I suggested something like that here… although most of the things I have to say about this is in my goshdang drafts. :p
I think Ryan Carey has a valid point. Current issues are valid and need to be respected.
However, I want to raise the thought: Maybe posting decisions should be mainly guided by its impact on posts in the long term future.
If you consider this diagram, it’s clear that, as an EA blogger put it: “out of a staggering number of [posts that] will ever exist, our [posts] will be among the first.”
If the forum moderator runs an event that decreases forum quality for 1 month, I think this is a small price to pay for the chance this increases long term posting quality/quantity.
Agreed. I still think it’s important for people without time to write high quality posts (like myself) to share unfinished ideas, so I’m envisioning a weekly pinned post where people put unfinished ideas as comments
Right. On the current margin, we need interventions that increase quality and decrease volume, not the opposite.
I feel like this is equivocating between different types of quality in a way that makes the statement confusing?
I think there are a number of people who could make a thrown together bullet point list that would be very valuable. E.g. this “off the cuff thoughts” post from Carl is still maybe one of the best references on EA and systemic change to this day?
These posts might be “poor quality” in some senses (lots of grammar/spelling mistakes, unclear narrative, etc.) but “high-quality” in the sense of having important ideas.
I understand DAD to be encouraging this kind of post, which I would argue we need more of on the margin.
I agree that there have been some high-quality posts that are lacking in regard to polish (the same is true for any other dimension of quality). But will the average unpolished draft that you attract be good? Highly doubt it.
Maybe I’m unusual, but my drafts are usually in draft stage not because I am uncertain about the conclusion but rather because of “polish”.
If other people are like me, I think I would be interested to see their unpolished thoughts. [1]
At least, I would like to spend a week giving it a try. At the end of that week I might decide it was a bad idea.
“Research debt” is only a problem if the community has the problem of feeling like they need to read everything/keep up with the literature in the first place. Well, mostly. Rather than limiting people’s willingness to communicate, should instead innovate on filtering higher-quality and lower-quality posts, for the dimensions you care about.
Alternatively/additionally, should split (self-sorted or not) into bubbles where newcomers feel safer to post, but still have an audience and a chance at prestige if they produce good work. I suggested something like that here… although most of the things I have to say about this is in my goshdang drafts. :p
I think Ryan Carey has a valid point. Current issues are valid and need to be respected.
However, I want to raise the thought: Maybe posting decisions should be mainly guided by its impact on posts in the long term future.
If you consider this diagram, it’s clear that, as an EA blogger put it: “out of a staggering number of [posts that] will ever exist, our [posts] will be among the first.”
If the forum moderator runs an event that decreases forum quality for 1 month, I think this is a small price to pay for the chance this increases long term posting quality/quantity.
Agreed. I still think it’s important for people without time to write high quality posts (like myself) to share unfinished ideas, so I’m envisioning a weekly pinned post where people put unfinished ideas as comments