This is a nice idea, but I agree with Hauke that this risks increasing the extent to which EA is an echo chamber. Perhaps you’re not aware of the (over)hype around some of these books in EA.
I think Rationally Speaking is particularly good at engaging with a range of people and perspectives.
Sorry for the late response — meant to publish this just after I read the comment. It’s not especially bad or anything, I’m just catching up on moderation.
First: Yes, Rationally Speaking is great!
Second: As a moderator, I read “perhaps you’re not aware” as a bit condescending, and I don’t think it follows from the post.
I don’t see why “creating a list of brief book reviews/ratings” implies that someone isn’t aware of what is or isn’t overhyped:
If I read a book and like it, that might lead me to believe the hype is deserved (some “hyped” things are in fact great, and more people should do them).
If I instead thought the book was bad and say so, that actively fights against the hype — a positive outcome!
I wish the comment had read more like “I think some of these books are overhyped, and this list might exacerbate that effect because...” instead of implying that the author was missing some important fact.
Thanks Aaron. Sure—“perhaps you’re not aware” was not intended to be condescending at all. And yes, the later sentence you wrote was the tone I was hoping for.
This is a nice idea, but I agree with Hauke that this risks increasing the extent to which EA is an echo chamber. Perhaps you’re not aware of the (over)hype around some of these books in EA.
I think Rationally Speaking is particularly good at engaging with a range of people and perspectives.
Sorry for the late response — meant to publish this just after I read the comment. It’s not especially bad or anything, I’m just catching up on moderation.
First: Yes, Rationally Speaking is great!
Second: As a moderator, I read “perhaps you’re not aware” as a bit condescending, and I don’t think it follows from the post.
I don’t see why “creating a list of brief book reviews/ratings” implies that someone isn’t aware of what is or isn’t overhyped:
If I read a book and like it, that might lead me to believe the hype is deserved (some “hyped” things are in fact great, and more people should do them).
If I instead thought the book was bad and say so, that actively fights against the hype — a positive outcome!
I wish the comment had read more like “I think some of these books are overhyped, and this list might exacerbate that effect because...” instead of implying that the author was missing some important fact.
Thanks Aaron. Sure—“perhaps you’re not aware” was not intended to be condescending at all. And yes, the later sentence you wrote was the tone I was hoping for.