Is there a list somewhere of all edits and retractions?
There is one relevant retraction. It comes up about once per discussion thread, and it is referred to obliquely in the header of every discussion thread. I know that you already know what it is.
Perhaps we should ROT13 the actual spoiler and stick it in the standard MOR discussion header, so that people stop missing the point.
It is a better story without that spoiler. People are very annoyed when it gets spoiled, with good reason.
Sure, the cat’s out of the bag, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily clawing your face yet.
I wasn’t sure of that before you said it. There could have been another. You could be wrong. It could change tomorrow. This is not good policy.
(EDIT turns out this is wrong—If it’s a better story without revealing that at that time, why did he write the chapter in such a way as he thought at the time it was an obvious reveal? Why is the text of that section unchanged when he decided not to reveal it after all—are people who can figure it out (as he assumed everyone would when he wrote it) not entitled to as good a story as people who can’t?--)
People are very annoyed when it gets spoiled. “People”. Not you, you already knew it. I am annoyed now. Who are these people?
Why is the text of that section unchanged when he decided not to reveal it after all—are people who can figure it out (as he assumed everyone would when he wrote it) not entitled to as good a story as people who can’t?
Figuring it out != getting it spoiled.
I was confident of that fact well before that section of the story. I would expect anyone with knowledge of canon to suspect a connection between the two characters.
But if you didn’t get it spoiled, you get to test your hypothesis against every new piece of evidence, and it’s a much more entertaining read.
If it’s a better story without revealing that at that time, why did he write the chapter in such a way as he thought at the time it was an obvious reveal?
Because he was convinced that it was a better story without it, after he wrote that chapter and AN.
EDIT: (responding to unmarked edit above)
People are very annoyed when it gets spoiled. “People”. Not you, you already knew it. I am annoyed now. Who are these people?
All of my friends either enjoy speculating about that fact because it wasn’t spoiled, or are annoyed that it was spoiled. I was annoyed when it was spoiled for me, in the original AN.
Is it a norm on Less Wrong that there is not a “grace period” to make an edit within a few seconds after posting and before anyone has replied, to make minor corrections or to add something that the user forgot to say and just realized after submitting the comment?
(Also, did I really deserve −8 karma for my opinions on this issue, or is it just a matter of −2 not seeming so bad when you do it four times?)
Is it a norm on Less Wrong that there is not a “grace period” to make an edit within a few seconds after posting and before anyone has replied, to make minor corrections or to add something that the user forgot to say and just realized after submitting the comment?
I haven’t downvoted any of your posts, but it need not be just your opinions—it may very well be the way you express them, either in terms of expressed hostility, or in terms of confusion/lack of clarity.
e.g. you’ve still not explained the meaning of the ‘should’ in “He made his decision—so he should live with it.” .
But frankly, I’d wager it’s just the constant aura of hostility you seem to exude towards the rest of us.
My perception was that the “retraction” was an attempt to reverse the effect of the original author’s note. This is obviously not actually possible. While EY probably knows this, I think he is overestimating the actual benefit of the retraction (and of the related decision to suppress discussion derived from that information in these threads).
The people the retraction is most likely to [arguably] benefit are people who started reading after it was removed and people who were reading it at the time but were inattentive to the author’s note and any discussion that happened in the intervening period. My assumption is that there are not actually very many people fitting that description participating in these threads. This is weighed against by the cost of imposing rot13 on all discussion derived from that information and arbitrary downvote penalties on people who are unaware of the rule (as well as acting as the spark that sets off arguments like this).
I also think that it’s possible that HPMOR discussion would be better served by a conventional forum rather than the reddit engine, as some others have mentioned, and that this could mitigate the spoiler problem, but that’s mostly unrelated.
So mostly you object to being told to go out of your way while discussing something you enjoy so that others can enjoy it the way the person who made the thing your discussing intended?
May I put those words in your mouth or should I wait for the foot to come out?
Is it a norm on Less Wrong that there is not a “grace period” to make an edit within a few seconds after posting and before anyone has replied, to make minor corrections or to add something that the user forgot to say and just realized after submitting the comment?
I’m not certain of what you’re asking, here, but I just found out that you can delete a post if no one has responded to it yet. So in case that’s what you were after, there’s that.
He said “responding to unmarked edit” as though there was something wrong with failing to mark a simple addition made 10 seconds after the original post. I was confused, since it was not my experience that anyone considered this a problem anywhere.
Oh. I edit mine when I make a mistake that makes them mean something else. Or when someone prompts me to.
But if you’re adding information then it’s useful to you to mark that you added something. That way the people that already pounced on your post notice there’s something new there while they’re pounding Refresh to see if you’ve responded to them.
There is one relevant retraction. It comes up about once per discussion thread, and it is referred to obliquely in the header of every discussion thread. I know that you already know what it is.
Perhaps we should ROT13 the actual spoiler and stick it in the standard MOR discussion header, so that people stop missing the point.
It is a better story without that spoiler. People are very annoyed when it gets spoiled, with good reason.
Sure, the cat’s out of the bag, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily clawing your face yet.
It’s mentioned explicitly in the “more specifically” link to the original spoiler policy.
What retraction are you referring to? I’ve heard of several, with none seeming more relevant than any other.
It’s mentioned explicitly in the “more specifically” link to the original spoiler policy.
Why am I repeating this?
Because you’re aptly pedantic?
It’s a blessing and a curse.
“There is one relevant retraction.”
I wasn’t sure of that before you said it. There could have been another. You could be wrong. It could change tomorrow. This is not good policy.
(EDIT turns out this is wrong—If it’s a better story without revealing that at that time, why did he write the chapter in such a way as he thought at the time it was an obvious reveal? Why is the text of that section unchanged when he decided not to reveal it after all—are people who can figure it out (as he assumed everyone would when he wrote it) not entitled to as good a story as people who can’t?--)
People are very annoyed when it gets spoiled. “People”. Not you, you already knew it. I am annoyed now. Who are these people?
Figuring it out != getting it spoiled.
I was confident of that fact well before that section of the story. I would expect anyone with knowledge of canon to suspect a connection between the two characters.
But if you didn’t get it spoiled, you get to test your hypothesis against every new piece of evidence, and it’s a much more entertaining read.
Because he was convinced that it was a better story without it, after he wrote that chapter and AN.
EDIT: (responding to unmarked edit above)
All of my friends either enjoy speculating about that fact because it wasn’t spoiled, or are annoyed that it was spoiled. I was annoyed when it was spoiled for me, in the original AN.
Is it a norm on Less Wrong that there is not a “grace period” to make an edit within a few seconds after posting and before anyone has replied, to make minor corrections or to add something that the user forgot to say and just realized after submitting the comment?
(Also, did I really deserve −8 karma for my opinions on this issue, or is it just a matter of −2 not seeming so bad when you do it four times?)
No
I haven’t downvoted any of your posts, but it need not be just your opinions—it may very well be the way you express them, either in terms of expressed hostility, or in terms of confusion/lack of clarity.
e.g. you’ve still not explained the meaning of the ‘should’ in “He made his decision—so he should live with it.” .
But frankly, I’d wager it’s just the constant aura of hostility you seem to exude towards the rest of us.
My perception was that the “retraction” was an attempt to reverse the effect of the original author’s note. This is obviously not actually possible. While EY probably knows this, I think he is overestimating the actual benefit of the retraction (and of the related decision to suppress discussion derived from that information in these threads).
The people the retraction is most likely to [arguably] benefit are people who started reading after it was removed and people who were reading it at the time but were inattentive to the author’s note and any discussion that happened in the intervening period. My assumption is that there are not actually very many people fitting that description participating in these threads. This is weighed against by the cost of imposing rot13 on all discussion derived from that information and arbitrary downvote penalties on people who are unaware of the rule (as well as acting as the spark that sets off arguments like this).
I also think that it’s possible that HPMOR discussion would be better served by a conventional forum rather than the reddit engine, as some others have mentioned, and that this could mitigate the spoiler problem, but that’s mostly unrelated.
So mostly you object to being told to go out of your way while discussing something you enjoy so that others can enjoy it the way the person who made the thing your discussing intended?
May I put those words in your mouth or should I wait for the foot to come out?
I’m not certain of what you’re asking, here, but I just found out that you can delete a post if no one has responded to it yet. So in case that’s what you were after, there’s that.
He said “responding to unmarked edit” as though there was something wrong with failing to mark a simple addition made 10 seconds after the original post. I was confused, since it was not my experience that anyone considered this a problem anywhere.
Oh. I edit mine when I make a mistake that makes them mean something else. Or when someone prompts me to.
But if you’re adding information then it’s useful to you to mark that you added something. That way the people that already pounced on your post notice there’s something new there while they’re pounding Refresh to see if you’ve responded to them.