There have been other related suggestions for how to make the sequences more accessible, one of which I described here. Instead of re-promoting the old post to the top of the front page, someone could just make a new post (probably in the discussion section) with a link to the old sequence post. The new post could have a standardized format for the title, to make it clear that it’s just linking back to the sequences, and perhaps a one paragraph summary of the post that it’s linking to.
An advantage of this method is that it’s ready to implement—there’s no need to program anything new into the site or wait on the folks in charge. We just need to decide on the conventions and then we can start the posts.
I have two specific ideas for what the conventions could be, which I’ll leave as comments so that they can be commented on & voted on separately. We could do either one of them, or both.
Idea two: Cycle through the sequences. Start with the first post in the first sequence and have one post per day in the discussion section. Each new post would contain a link to the original post and a one paragraph summary of the post (which could be copied directly from the wiki in many cases). Any additional comments or discussion would take place in the comments to the new post.
I think this is a great idea. I’ve been reading through the sequences and, while I would like to comment, it seems silly to participate in a conversation that occurred two years ago. So the point would be just to have a “fresh” conversation about an old post. I think this is a good idea in general; for some reason the internet likes to pretend that anything written about more than a week ago doesn’t exist or isn’t relevant.
For what it’s worth, when I discovered the site last year I started working through the Overcoming Bias archives linearly, and I went ahead and commented on those posts when I felt moved to.
Occasionally people would respond; more often they wouldn’t. Which is true for my comments on current posts, as well. And others’. So I’m not sure there’s too much difference.
All of which is to say that I endorse overcoming the sense that commenting on old posts is too silly to do.
Idea one: Post a link to an individual post. It could be one of your favorites, or any old post that you consider relevant or want to discuss. Just make a post in the discussion section with a link to the old post plus an explanation of why you reposted it—a sentence saying that it’s a great post about X could be enough, or you could give a longer commentary if you have one. Further discussion can take place in the comments to your post.
I’m in favor of doing this or something similar.
There have been other related suggestions for how to make the sequences more accessible, one of which I described here. Instead of re-promoting the old post to the top of the front page, someone could just make a new post (probably in the discussion section) with a link to the old sequence post. The new post could have a standardized format for the title, to make it clear that it’s just linking back to the sequences, and perhaps a one paragraph summary of the post that it’s linking to.
An advantage of this method is that it’s ready to implement—there’s no need to program anything new into the site or wait on the folks in charge. We just need to decide on the conventions and then we can start the posts.
I have two specific ideas for what the conventions could be, which I’ll leave as comments so that they can be commented on & voted on separately. We could do either one of them, or both.
Idea two: Cycle through the sequences. Start with the first post in the first sequence and have one post per day in the discussion section. Each new post would contain a link to the original post and a one paragraph summary of the post (which could be copied directly from the wiki in many cases). Any additional comments or discussion would take place in the comments to the new post.
I think this is a great idea. I’ve been reading through the sequences and, while I would like to comment, it seems silly to participate in a conversation that occurred two years ago. So the point would be just to have a “fresh” conversation about an old post. I think this is a good idea in general; for some reason the internet likes to pretend that anything written about more than a week ago doesn’t exist or isn’t relevant.
For what it’s worth, when I discovered the site last year I started working through the Overcoming Bias archives linearly, and I went ahead and commented on those posts when I felt moved to.
Occasionally people would respond; more often they wouldn’t. Which is true for my comments on current posts, as well. And others’. So I’m not sure there’s too much difference.
All of which is to say that I endorse overcoming the sense that commenting on old posts is too silly to do.
Idea one: Post a link to an individual post. It could be one of your favorites, or any old post that you consider relevant or want to discuss. Just make a post in the discussion section with a link to the old post plus an explanation of why you reposted it—a sentence saying that it’s a great post about X could be enough, or you could give a longer commentary if you have one. Further discussion can take place in the comments to your post.