People at Location X and Y move to Location Z.
People in a city switch from using cars to using other forms of transport.
Switching from worse dating sites to something better.
People in a group house switching from defecting on cleaning the house out of expectation others won’t help clean, to one in which everyone starts cleaning because they expect others to cooperate in cleaning.
Buying or renting an otherwise too-expensive property.
Switching from the Multiplayer Game That Everyone Is Playing to a Better Multiplayer Game.
Switching to a new religion from Christianity.
Accountability contracts—“I’ll engage in habit X if Y other people are also engaging in Habit X conditional on Y other people engaging in Habit X”
“I’ll stop making political posts if >75% of my friends also agree to stop making political posts”, “I’ll stop making memes if 1000 other people also agree to stop making them”.
Recruiting people to make world record attempts that involve large numbers of people, where it’s not worth marginally joining if that doesn’t look likely and therefore it doesn’t get off the ground.
Recruiting people to do things that would otherwise result in the police arresting them if there were a smaller amount of people, e.g. 1 million people using psychedelics as a protest in Washington D.C.
People attending events in general! Many events don’t have a critical mass to seem worthy of joining on the margin.
Starting an exercise circle if there are 5 other people to also start it with.
Going through a course of study if there are 10 other people to also study it with.
Switching people from Bitcoin to whatever is better (how would people decide that?).
Meta: sufficient amount of people coordinating to use the same Kickstarter for Inadequate Equilibria. (I’m sorry)
I can write more specific examples upon request.
What weird experiments?
I was wrong on producing a writeup that qualifies as “a writeup” (I’m not sure exactly where I would have put it after the draft had been finished). I am poorly calibrated in personal action predictions (it may be the case that I am only tempted to make a prediction that I’ll do a thing when I want to signal to myself or others that I will in fact do a thing when the outside view says I won’t, so I should probably update downward that I’ll do a thing if I find myself trying to predict a probability that I’ll do it, over and above the normal downward adjustment for planning fallacy and Hofstadter’s Law).
Thankfully there is satisfactory content on the subject. For instance, “Group Debugging” seems to be the thing-that-is-doing-the-closest-thing-to-this at meetups that is more repeatable and tractable than the original Hamming question (it’s basically what the Hamming thing I said I facilitated was), though it is somewhat different from the broad scope of the original (though I don’t like the word “Debugging” associated with this exercise, it seems to fetishize using programming metaphors to apply to human psychology, which feels sterile, cliquey, overreliant on usage of “System 2” solutions, and not as obviously descriptive of what is happening as it could be. Maybe “Group Problem-Solving”?).
I facilitated a Hamming Circle two days ago and it looks like I will produce some kind of writeup someday, >50% probability.
I believe Null Hypothesis. This site isn’t getting too many comments so there’s plenty room for variation. I would definitely rule out Hypothesis 7.