As an infrequent long term user of the forum, I just found the link to the wiki section (for the first time that I remember). I had seen the tags at the top of posts and occasionally checked or added them, but that was it.
It looks excellent based on some quick browsing, and I can imagine it being very useful to me and others in the community as it gets fleshed out.
Perhaps my user experience helps explain the lack of current usage. I have two user journeys on the EA forum: I come to read or post. When I come to read I, I see many good posts, many more than I have time to engage with, look at one or two, (attempt to) make a quick comment then leave. When I come to post, I post quickly then get out. At no point does the wiki really fit into either journey or tempt me to go on a different journey (e.g., to browse new additions).
It has been a while since I was actively seeking to learn about EA (in a broad an unfocused sense), so I am not sure if I would come to this wiki for that. Possibly. If that is one of its intended uses, the fact that I have never really considered that as an option, despite being on the forum so much might be a problem.
My update from reflecting on all that:
Perhaps there should be more triggers for using and engaging with the wiki?
Possibly once a period, one wiki article could get featured in the front pages posts, with some accompanying blurb about the wiki and the value of adding updates? And/​or an update about the new content added this month?
Possibly there is a need for spreading more awareness about the depth of information available on the wiki via a social media campaign across our various groups? I have never seen a post about it outside the forum, I think.
Maybe we nudge more social media groups, websites and services in the EA ecosystem to link to the wiki when referencing key concepts?
Possibly the forum could have a new posting flow where people are asked to submit their post to a relevant wiki article before they add a post?
Perhaps there should be more incentives to update the wiki?
Right now people see to get more rewards and status for posting in the forum than working on the wiki and I don’t think that that is actually reflective of the respective impacts of the work. A good wiki probably build knowledge better than a lot of unlinked posts on different topics.
Possibly EA granting organisation could require the final results of funded research/​reviews to be integrated into the EA wiki?
Perhaps it is worth doing some user/​conversion testing on the wiki? How do people arrive at it, what do they do, what do we want them to do etc? What percentage of EAs/​EA forum users even know about it? What percentage of those who use it find it useful? Etc.
Perhaps it needs a user growth/​marketing person to help Pablo to promote it to key groups who might not know how and why to use it?
Here’s one idea: Automatic or low-effort linking to wiki-tags when writing posts or comments. A few different versions of this:
When you write a comment or post that has contains the exact name of a tag/​wiki article, those words automatically link to that tag. (This could potentially be turned on/​off in the editor or in your personal prefs.)
The same as the above except it only happens if you do something special to the words, e.g. enclose them in [[double brackets]], surround them by [tag] [/​tag], or capitalise correctly. (Magic the gathering forums often have something like this for linking to cards.)
The same as the above, except there’s some helpful search function that helps you find relevant wiki articles. E.g. you type [[ or you click some particular button in the editor, and then a box for searching for tags pops up. (Similar to linking to another page in Roam. This could also be implemented for linking to posts.)
Strong upvoted! I think something like this would introduce exactly the kinds of people whom we would like to use the wiki, to the wiki. I like the first version best, as many writers might not be aware of the ways to link to tags, and not be aware of what tags exist. Also, this nudges writers to use the same concepts for their words (because it is embarrassing to use a word linked to a tag in another sense then is explained in that tag).
There are some great ideas here! I’ve added them to the transition doc I wrote for my successor, in case they want to take on improving the Wiki after they’ve been hired.
Thanks for this!
As an infrequent long term user of the forum, I just found the link to the wiki section (for the first time that I remember). I had seen the tags at the top of posts and occasionally checked or added them, but that was it.
It looks excellent based on some quick browsing, and I can imagine it being very useful to me and others in the community as it gets fleshed out.
Perhaps my user experience helps explain the lack of current usage. I have two user journeys on the EA forum: I come to read or post. When I come to read I, I see many good posts, many more than I have time to engage with, look at one or two, (attempt to) make a quick comment then leave. When I come to post, I post quickly then get out. At no point does the wiki really fit into either journey or tempt me to go on a different journey (e.g., to browse new additions).
It has been a while since I was actively seeking to learn about EA (in a broad an unfocused sense), so I am not sure if I would come to this wiki for that. Possibly. If that is one of its intended uses, the fact that I have never really considered that as an option, despite being on the forum so much might be a problem.
My update from reflecting on all that:
Perhaps there should be more triggers for using and engaging with the wiki?
Possibly once a period, one wiki article could get featured in the front pages posts, with some accompanying blurb about the wiki and the value of adding updates? And/​or an update about the new content added this month?
Possibly there is a need for spreading more awareness about the depth of information available on the wiki via a social media campaign across our various groups? I have never seen a post about it outside the forum, I think.
Maybe we nudge more social media groups, websites and services in the EA ecosystem to link to the wiki when referencing key concepts?
Possibly the forum could have a new posting flow where people are asked to submit their post to a relevant wiki article before they add a post?
Perhaps there should be more incentives to update the wiki?
Right now people see to get more rewards and status for posting in the forum than working on the wiki and I don’t think that that is actually reflective of the respective impacts of the work. A good wiki probably build knowledge better than a lot of unlinked posts on different topics.
Possibly EA granting organisation could require the final results of funded research/​reviews to be integrated into the EA wiki?
Perhaps it is worth doing some user/​conversion testing on the wiki? How do people arrive at it, what do they do, what do we want them to do etc? What percentage of EAs/​EA forum users even know about it? What percentage of those who use it find it useful? Etc.
Perhaps it needs a user growth/​marketing person to help Pablo to promote it to key groups who might not know how and why to use it?
Here’s one idea: Automatic or low-effort linking to wiki-tags when writing posts or comments. A few different versions of this:
When you write a comment or post that has contains the exact name of a tag/​wiki article, those words automatically link to that tag. (This could potentially be turned on/​off in the editor or in your personal prefs.)
The same as the above except it only happens if you do something special to the words, e.g. enclose them in [[double brackets]], surround them by [tag] [/​tag], or capitalise correctly. (Magic the gathering forums often have something like this for linking to cards.)
The same as the above, except there’s some helpful search function that helps you find relevant wiki articles. E.g. you type [[ or you click some particular button in the editor, and then a box for searching for tags pops up. (Similar to linking to another page in Roam. This could also be implemented for linking to posts.)
Strong upvoted! I think something like this would introduce exactly the kinds of people whom we would like to use the wiki, to the wiki. I like the first version best, as many writers might not be aware of the ways to link to tags, and not be aware of what tags exist. Also, this nudges writers to use the same concepts for their words (because it is embarrassing to use a word linked to a tag in another sense then is explained in that tag).
There are some great ideas here! I’ve added them to the transition doc I wrote for my successor, in case they want to take on improving the Wiki after they’ve been hired.
These are all good points, thanks!
I’d love to see students receiving intern-level pay during the summer break to spend time on the Wiki.