Not safe to publish: the design contains materially deceptive UI elements and misleading metadata. It fabricates official-looking site statistics and labels (e.g. fake site rating/votes, live stats, views today, random online counts, VIP/PREMIUM/FEATURED style badges, and corner-ribbon slogans like EDITOR’S PICK / PREMIUM) that could mislead users about LessWrong content and status. It also uses highly manipulative clickbait framing around login/access (‘FREE LOGIN’, ‘LIMITED TIME OFFER’, ‘FREE FULL ACCESS TO ALL POSTS’) and altered branding (‘LessWrong.xxx’), which is not outright credential phishing but is suspicious and misleading for an official home page.
I am overruling it. Bring forth the hot rationality conceptposts.
LessWrongXXX
If lesswrong were a scammy porn website
The auto-review bot did not appreciate this one:
Not safe to publish: the design contains materially deceptive UI elements and misleading metadata. It fabricates official-looking site statistics and labels (e.g. fake site rating/votes, live stats, views today, random online counts, VIP/PREMIUM/FEATURED style badges, and corner-ribbon slogans like EDITOR’S PICK / PREMIUM) that could mislead users about LessWrong content and status. It also uses highly manipulative clickbait framing around login/access (‘FREE LOGIN’, ‘LIMITED TIME OFFER’, ‘FREE FULL ACCESS TO ALL POSTS’) and altered branding (‘LessWrong.xxx’), which is not outright credential phishing but is suspicious and misleading for an official home page.
I am overruling it. Bring forth the hot rationality conceptposts.
(Edit: This was GPT-5.4 not Sonnet.)
LessDong I think you mean