There was some discussion about epistemic status as a norm here. Sample size of, like, 2-3. My own take is that this class of epistemic status would be fine if it were rare, but when it’s one of three epistemic statuses, it makes it hard to really grok what epistemic-status-as-a-norm is even doing. (see Magic the Gathering where complicated things are fine as long as they’re not at common)
I can believe a model where there’s a budget for some amount of weird ES, and there’s a potential tragedy of the commons if that budget is overused where it then becomes something different and less useful, and also a similar thing within a given blog/writer since it’s clear that DWATV ESs aren’t going to usually be ‘confident’, ‘uncertain’ or what not.
One possibility, given that ES isn’t used that much right now (e.g. I looked at all other front page LW posts on ‘all posts’ plus the 3 curated, and there were no other ESs), is I accept that I’m doing a different thing and call it ‘vibe’ or something.
There was some discussion about epistemic status as a norm here. Sample size of, like, 2-3. My own take is that this class of epistemic status would be fine if it were rare, but when it’s one of three epistemic statuses, it makes it hard to really grok what epistemic-status-as-a-norm is even doing. (see Magic the Gathering where complicated things are fine as long as they’re not at common)
I can believe a model where there’s a budget for some amount of weird ES, and there’s a potential tragedy of the commons if that budget is overused where it then becomes something different and less useful, and also a similar thing within a given blog/writer since it’s clear that DWATV ESs aren’t going to usually be ‘confident’, ‘uncertain’ or what not.
One possibility, given that ES isn’t used that much right now (e.g. I looked at all other front page LW posts on ‘all posts’ plus the 3 curated, and there were no other ESs), is I accept that I’m doing a different thing and call it ‘vibe’ or something.
Something like that makes sense to me.