I don’t know how much time you have to go back and expand it, but wordcount, a quick quality rating, and a summary would all be useful additions to the table.
Thanks for the feedback. I could add wordcount. Not sure what you mean by quality rating; LW, OB, and EA Forum have their own voting/rating mechanisms but are not compatible (so putting them in a column might be confusing, although grouping by venue and looking at ratings within each venue might be interesting). Summary would be the most time-consuming to produce, and many of Carl’s posts have summaries at the top.
By quality rating, I mean a more subjective assessment; they are not all equally careful, high quality, or important, so some estimate would be helpful, as well as summaries. Shulman’s own abstracts or summaries can be copied over where available, and new ones written where not.
I don’t know how much time you have to go back and expand it, but wordcount, a quick quality rating, and a summary would all be useful additions to the table.
Thanks for the feedback. I could add wordcount. Not sure what you mean by quality rating; LW, OB, and EA Forum have their own voting/rating mechanisms but are not compatible (so putting them in a column might be confusing, although grouping by venue and looking at ratings within each venue might be interesting). Summary would be the most time-consuming to produce, and many of Carl’s posts have summaries at the top.
The titles are also formatted oddly.
By quality rating, I mean a more subjective assessment; they are not all equally careful, high quality, or important, so some estimate would be helpful, as well as summaries. Shulman’s own abstracts or summaries can be copied over where available, and new ones written where not.