Cool, fwiw I’d predict that a well-written anthropic piece would get more than the 150 karma the Whytam post currently has, though I acknowledge that “well-written” is vague. Based on what this commenter says, we might get to test that prediction soon.
FWIW the Wytham Abbey post also received ~240 votes, and I doubt that a majority of downvotes were given for the reason that people found the general topic unimportant. Instead I think it’s because the post seemed written fairly quickly and in a prematurely judgemental way. So it doesn’t seem right to take the karma level as evidence that this topic actually didn’t get a ton of attention.
Good point, I wasn’t tracking that the Wytham post doesn’t actually have that much Karma. I do think my claim would be correct regarding my first example (spending norms vs. asset hedges).
My claim might also be correct if your metric of choice was the sum of all the comment Karma on the respective posts.
Yeah, seems believable to me on both counts, though I currently feel more sad that we don’t have posts about those more important things than the possibility that the karma system would counterfactually rank those posts poorly if they existed.
Cool, fwiw I’d predict that a well-written anthropic piece would get more than the 150 karma the Whytam post currently has, though I acknowledge that “well-written” is vague. Based on what this commenter says, we might get to test that prediction soon.
FWIW the Wytham Abbey post also received ~240 votes, and I doubt that a majority of downvotes were given for the reason that people found the general topic unimportant. Instead I think it’s because the post seemed written fairly quickly and in a prematurely judgemental way. So it doesn’t seem right to take the karma level as evidence that this topic actually didn’t get a ton of attention.
How do you see it got 240 votes?
Anyway I agree that I wrote it quickly and prematurely. I edited it to add my current thoughts.
You can see the number of votes by hovering your mouse above the karma.
Good point, I wasn’t tracking that the Wytham post doesn’t actually have that much Karma. I do think my claim would be correct regarding my first example (spending norms vs. asset hedges).
My claim might also be correct if your metric of choice was the sum of all the comment Karma on the respective posts.
Yeah, seems believable to me on both counts, though I currently feel more sad that we don’t have posts about those more important things than the possibility that the karma system would counterfactually rank those posts poorly if they existed.