I circumambulated the idea of meta-processes with the wonderfully inscrutable SquirrelInHell
I realize the word “circumambulate” isn’t doing zero work in this sentence, but is the value of “circumambulate” over a more common word like “explore” high enough to have it start making it’s way into common jargon?
(I liked the initial circumambulate post, but then you and Squirrel started using it fairly regularly and I’m not sure it’s pulling it’s weight as new-jargon-to-keep-track-of. I am pro “give nuanced concepts nuanced words that prevent you from thinking you understand them”, but still think each new term that get’s commonly used on LW is a barrier-to-entry-cost that should be weighed against that)
Yeah, I hear you. My current strategy is just innovate and let the market decide if things are important enough to catch on, I’ll probably drop it in a few weeks if it’s just the two of us still using it. Curious if there’s a clearly better plan?
See, this is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about. If Raemon hadn’t posted this comment, I would have no idea that this even is a specific piece of jargon. I read it, and assumed that ‘circumambulated’ was just a rather quirky way of saying ‘discussed’.
I don’t even really have an opinion on whether this is a good (i.e., worthwhile) piece of jargon or not! But it would be quite helpful if, at least, there were a norm of linking to something at least somewhat relevant, when using a piece of jargon that isn’t definitely very widely known among your readers—if for no other reason than to indicate that it is a piece of jargon (i.e., a word which you are using in a domain-specific way, or that has a domain-specific meaning).
I realize the word “circumambulate” isn’t doing zero work in this sentence, but is the value of “circumambulate” over a more common word like “explore” high enough to have it start making it’s way into common jargon?
(I liked the initial circumambulate post, but then you and Squirrel started using it fairly regularly and I’m not sure it’s pulling it’s weight as new-jargon-to-keep-track-of. I am pro “give nuanced concepts nuanced words that prevent you from thinking you understand them”, but still think each new term that get’s commonly used on LW is a barrier-to-entry-cost that should be weighed against that)
Yeah, I hear you. My current strategy is just innovate and let the market decide if things are important enough to catch on, I’ll probably drop it in a few weeks if it’s just the two of us still using it. Curious if there’s a clearly better plan?
See, this is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about. If Raemon hadn’t posted this comment, I would have no idea that this even is a specific piece of jargon. I read it, and assumed that ‘circumambulated’ was just a rather quirky way of saying ‘discussed’.
I don’t even really have an opinion on whether this is a good (i.e., worthwhile) piece of jargon or not! But it would be quite helpful if, at least, there were a norm of linking to something at least somewhat relevant, when using a piece of jargon that isn’t definitely very widely known among your readers—if for no other reason than to indicate that it is a piece of jargon (i.e., a word which you are using in a domain-specific way, or that has a domain-specific meaning).