I could imagine some people not liking this as it might make the forum a more intimidating place to post to. I imagine that the kind of person who says this would have less of an issue with: * people opting in by making the post a non-personal post * people opting in by adding a “check-me” tag
Another mechanism could be for the forum team to pay out $25 bounties when people falsify claims (as a way to incentivise this kind of checking), and maybe take some of the authors karma.
One worry is that if there’s negative feedback for making clearly falsifiable claims, people will stop making clear claims. Another worry is that the service is inaccurate, like sometimes happened with Facebook fact-checkers.
A human “epistemic spot checker” who tries to find flaws in verifiable claims made in EA Forum posts
This would be awesome!
I could imagine some people not liking this as it might make the forum a more intimidating place to post to. I imagine that the kind of person who says this would have less of an issue with:
* people opting in by making the post a non-personal post
* people opting in by adding a “check-me” tag
Another mechanism could be for the forum team to pay out $25 bounties when people falsify claims (as a way to incentivise this kind of checking), and maybe take some of the authors karma.
The epistemic spot checker could also notice flaws in reasoning; I think Rohin Shah has done this well.
One worry is that if there’s negative feedback for making clearly falsifiable claims, people will stop making clear claims. Another worry is that the service is inaccurate, like sometimes happened with Facebook fact-checkers.