If this hasn’t already been done, I volunteer to create the group and become its moderator. I’m not especially fond of moderating, but I think a moderator is required, and I have couchsurfing experience and I am interested in using couchsurfing.org in the future.
I think we should nail down the following group settings before group creation: (for brevity, I put in brackets my proposed settings)
Who may see this group? anyone or invite only (anyone)
Who may see group messages? (anyone)
Who may join this group? (anyone)
What should be the name of the group? (less wrong)
In my opinion, LessWrong is more appropriate for URL or identifier and Less Wrong sounds too pretentious, so I propose to name it in lowercase: less wrong. However, maybe that’s because my native language is Russian (in Russian you capitalize only the first letter of the title) and I just didn’t get used to it.
Under which category do we create the group? (Ideas)
“Atheism” group is under “Ideas”. Strangely more popular (sic) “Anarchy And Atheism” and “Atheists & Agnostics” are under “Politics/Government”, but I don’t think it’s right.
Options are the following: Places, People, Ideas, Activities and Sports, Adventures and Travelogues, Budget and Shoestring, Organizations, Student, Politics/Government, Party Train, Music and Art, Other, The CouchSurfing Project, CS Volunteering, CS Organization.
What group description should we put in? I suggest the introductory description from the site Less Wrong, together with working links:
Thinking and deciding are central to our daily lives. The Less Wrong community aims to gain expertise in how human brains think and decide, so that we can do so more successfully. We use the latest insights from cognitive science, social psychology, probability theory, and decision theory to improve our understanding of how the world works and what we can do to achieve our goals.
P.S. I propose to put up a suggestion that those who join “less wrong” group on couchsurfing.org would put their LessWrong username in the field “Reason to join” for the group. This way, it would be easy to identify you if you want to.
If this hasn’t already been done, I volunteer to create the group and become its moderator. I’m not especially fond of moderating, but I think a moderator is required, and I have couchsurfing experience and I am interested in using couchsurfing.org in the future.
I think we should nail down the following group settings before group creation: (for brevity, I put in brackets my proposed settings)
Who may see this group? anyone or invite only (anyone)
Who may see group messages? (anyone)
Who may join this group? (anyone)
What should be the name of the group? (less wrong) In my opinion, LessWrong is more appropriate for URL or identifier and Less Wrong sounds too pretentious, so I propose to name it in lowercase: less wrong. However, maybe that’s because my native language is Russian (in Russian you capitalize only the first letter of the title) and I just didn’t get used to it.
Under which category do we create the group? (Ideas) “Atheism” group is under “Ideas”. Strangely more popular (sic) “Anarchy And Atheism” and “Atheists & Agnostics” are under “Politics/Government”, but I don’t think it’s right. Options are the following: Places, People, Ideas, Activities and Sports, Adventures and Travelogues, Budget and Shoestring, Organizations, Student, Politics/Government, Party Train, Music and Art, Other, The CouchSurfing Project, CS Volunteering, CS Organization.
What group description should we put in? I suggest the introductory description from the site Less Wrong, together with working links:
P.S. I propose to put up a suggestion that those who join “less wrong” group on couchsurfing.org would put their LessWrong username in the field “Reason to join” for the group. This way, it would be easy to identify you if you want to.
Did this get created yet?
Just did it: LessWrong (CouchSurfing group)
I think I will announce it with separate post in the Discussion.
1-3 agree
I would go for lesswrong.com so the mapping to the website is immediately obvious. Although this might infringe on the CS rules, not sure about that.
Ideas, People or Organizations sounds best for me.
Agree.