And yes, I thought about that for some of your posts indeed. I think my take on technical posts is that it’s possible to engage with them without having anything new to bring to the table. But at least for me, knowing if people generally agree/disagree is still useful.
Although the prediction feature might be more appropriate for that… What do you think? Does replacing the feedback without engagement by a vote on a prediction “You agree with the content of this post” or something more detailed, seems like a good idea to you?
I mean the Elicit binary predictions you can embed on LW, as presented in this post. So making a prediction with “You agree with my take on [topic of the post]”, and then letting people predict/vote to give contentless feedback.
Thanks!
And yes, I thought about that for some of your posts indeed. I think my take on technical posts is that it’s possible to engage with them without having anything new to bring to the table. But at least for me, knowing if people generally agree/disagree is still useful.
Although the prediction feature might be more appropriate for that… What do you think? Does replacing the feedback without engagement by a vote on a prediction “You agree with the content of this post” or something more detailed, seems like a good idea to you?
Not sure I understand. What’s “a vote on a prediction ‘you agree with the content of this post’”?
I mean the Elicit binary predictions you can embed on LW, as presented in this post. So making a prediction with “You agree with my take on [topic of the post]”, and then letting people predict/vote to give contentless feedback.
Ah, I see. I understood that you meant Elicit, but was jarred by the way this isn’t really a prediction.
I think it would make sense to offer predictions on object-level issues in a post, rather than the indirect “predict whether you personally agree”.