Somehow in this context the notion of “picking the low-hanging fruit” keeps coming up. This is prejudgmental and one would have a hard time disagreeing with such an action. Intentional Insights marketing is also discussed on Facebook. I definitely second the thence stated opinion that the suggested T-Shirts and rings are counterproductive and, honestly, ridiculous. Judging the articles is seems more difficult. If the monthly newsletter generates significant readership, this might be useful in the future. However, LW and Rationality FB groups already have their fair share of borderline self-help questions. I would not choose to further push in this direction.
I was also unimpressed by the T-shirts. It’s just… I think it’s easier to move from “bad shirts” to “good shirts” than from “no shirts” to “good shirts”. It’s just a different bitmap to print.
(My personal preference about shirts is “less is better”. I would like to have a T-shirt only saying “LessWrong.com″, and even that with smaller letters, not across the whole body. And preferably not a cheap looking shirt; not being white would probably be a good start.)
Generally, what I would really like is something between the Intentional Insights approach, and what we are doing now. Something between “hey, I’m selling something! look here! look here! gimme your money and I will teach you the secret!” and “uhm, I’m sitting here in the corner, bumbling something silently, please continue to ignore me, we are just a small group of nerds”. And no, the difference is not between “taking money” and “not taking money”; CFAR lessons aren’t free either.
Seems to me that nerds have the well-known bias of “too much talking, no action”. That’s not a reason to go exactly the opposite way. It’s just… admirable what a single dedicated person can do.
Thanks for the positive sentiment about the single dedicated person!
Just FYI, there’s much more that Intentional Insights does than the click-bait stuff on Lifehack. We try to cover the whole range between CFAR’s targeting of the top 5%, and ClearerThinking’s targeting of techy young people in the coastal cities already interested in decision-making (the latter is from my conversations with Spencer Greenberg). We’ve been heavily orienting toward the skeptic/secular market as a start, and then right now are going into the self-improvement sector and also policy/politics commentary. We offer a wide variety of content, much of it higher-level than the self-improvement articles. I talk more about this topic in my comment about our strategy.
To be clear about taking money, Intentional Insights is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, not a for-profit company. The vast majority of our content is free, and we make our way mainly on donations.
P.S. Will keep in mind your preferences for a shirt. We currently have one that looks a lot like what you describe, here Can you let me know how that looks compared to your ideal?
I hear you about the t-shirts and rings, and we are trying to optimize those. Here are two options of t-shirts we think are better: 1 and 2. What do you think?
They are, but I still would not wear them.
(And no rings for men unless you are married or have been a champion in basketball or wrestling.)
Let’s differentiate two cases in whom we may want to address:
1) Aspiring rationalists: That’s the easy case. Take an awesome shirt, sneak in “LW” or “pi” somewhere, and try to fly below the radar of anybody who would not like it. A moebius strip might do the same, a drawing of a cat in a box may work but also be misunderstood.
2) The not-yet aspiring rationalist: I assume, this is the main target group of InIns. I consider this way more difficult, because you have to keep the weirdness points below the gain. And you have to convey interest in a difficult-to-grasp concept on a small area. And nerds are still less “cool” than sex, drugs, and sports. A Space X T-Shirt may do the job (rockets are cool), but LW concepts? I haven’t seen a convincing solution, but will ask around. Until then, the best solution to me seems to dress as your tribe expects you to find other ways of spreading the knowledge.
1) For actual aspiring rationalists, we do want to encourage those who want to promote rationality to be able to do so through shirts they would enjoy. For example, how does this one strike you.
2) For the not-yet aspiring rationalist, do you think the shirts above, 1 and 2, do the job?
Somehow in this context the notion of “picking the low-hanging fruit” keeps coming up. This is prejudgmental and one would have a hard time disagreeing with such an action. Intentional Insights marketing is also discussed on Facebook. I definitely second the thence stated opinion that the suggested T-Shirts and rings are counterproductive and, honestly, ridiculous. Judging the articles is seems more difficult. If the monthly newsletter generates significant readership, this might be useful in the future. However, LW and Rationality FB groups already have their fair share of borderline self-help questions. I would not choose to further push in this direction.
I was also unimpressed by the T-shirts. It’s just… I think it’s easier to move from “bad shirts” to “good shirts” than from “no shirts” to “good shirts”. It’s just a different bitmap to print.
(My personal preference about shirts is “less is better”. I would like to have a T-shirt only saying “LessWrong.com″, and even that with smaller letters, not across the whole body. And preferably not a cheap looking shirt; not being white would probably be a good start.)
Generally, what I would really like is something between the Intentional Insights approach, and what we are doing now. Something between “hey, I’m selling something! look here! look here! gimme your money and I will teach you the secret!” and “uhm, I’m sitting here in the corner, bumbling something silently, please continue to ignore me, we are just a small group of nerds”. And no, the difference is not between “taking money” and “not taking money”; CFAR lessons aren’t free either.
Seems to me that nerds have the well-known bias of “too much talking, no action”. That’s not a reason to go exactly the opposite way. It’s just… admirable what a single dedicated person can do.
Thanks for the positive sentiment about the single dedicated person!
Just FYI, there’s much more that Intentional Insights does than the click-bait stuff on Lifehack. We try to cover the whole range between CFAR’s targeting of the top 5%, and ClearerThinking’s targeting of techy young people in the coastal cities already interested in decision-making (the latter is from my conversations with Spencer Greenberg). We’ve been heavily orienting toward the skeptic/secular market as a start, and then right now are going into the self-improvement sector and also policy/politics commentary. We offer a wide variety of content, much of it higher-level than the self-improvement articles. I talk more about this topic in my comment about our strategy.
To be clear about taking money, Intentional Insights is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, not a for-profit company. The vast majority of our content is free, and we make our way mainly on donations.
P.S. Will keep in mind your preferences for a shirt. We currently have one that looks a lot like what you describe, here Can you let me know how that looks compared to your ideal?
Colors: great.
(The grey-brown and pink versions are also okay. I guess any version other than white is okay.)
Font size: still too large.
By how many percent smaller would be good?
Two inches high at most. However, feel free to ignore me; I almost surely won’t buy the shirt, and other people may have different preferences.
Anyway, this is off-topic, so I won’t comment here about the shirts anymore.
I think quite the reverse. Inertia is a thing and bad shirts are “we already have them”.
Making some shirts is a low-effort endeavour -- just throw the design at CafePress or Zazzle and you’re done.
I prefer the experimental approach, of experimenting and then figuring out better ways to do things. This is how the most successful startups work.
Besides, we are doing new t-shirts now based on the feedback. Your thoughts on these two options would be helpful 1 and 2.
For this you need a way to measure and assess outcomes. What is the metric that you are using to figure out what’s “better”?
Feedback from aspiring rationalists :-)
I hear you about the t-shirts and rings, and we are trying to optimize those. Here are two options of t-shirts we think are better: 1 and 2. What do you think?
I find your chutzpah impressive.
Thanks, I try to not be knocked down by negative feedback, and instead welcome bad news as good news and optimize :-)
They are, but I still would not wear them. (And no rings for men unless you are married or have been a champion in basketball or wrestling.)
Let’s differentiate two cases in whom we may want to address: 1) Aspiring rationalists: That’s the easy case. Take an awesome shirt, sneak in “LW” or “pi” somewhere, and try to fly below the radar of anybody who would not like it. A moebius strip might do the same, a drawing of a cat in a box may work but also be misunderstood. 2) The not-yet aspiring rationalist: I assume, this is the main target group of InIns. I consider this way more difficult, because you have to keep the weirdness points below the gain. And you have to convey interest in a difficult-to-grasp concept on a small area. And nerds are still less “cool” than sex, drugs, and sports. A Space X T-Shirt may do the job (rockets are cool), but LW concepts? I haven’t seen a convincing solution, but will ask around. Until then, the best solution to me seems to dress as your tribe expects you to find other ways of spreading the knowledge.
1) For actual aspiring rationalists, we do want to encourage those who want to promote rationality to be able to do so through shirts they would enjoy. For example, how does this one strike you.
2) For the not-yet aspiring rationalist, do you think the shirts above, 1 and 2, do the job?