I’m confused; is your criticism that posts after the sequences failed to introduce new ideas the way the sequences did or didn’t stick in the community’s collective memory?
They introduced new ideas and failed to stick in the community memory. Why is not clear. (I could easily come up with just-so stories to retrospectively explain it, of course.)
One just-so story: The sequences are mentioned everywhere as The Way To Read Less Wrong; random archive posts are not. Therefore a larger fraction of LW has read the sequences.
Yeah, that’s the one that occurred to me too. The site is stuck in 2008. Even Eliezer doesn’t necessarily think the stuff he wrote word for word there any more.
I’m confused; is your criticism that posts after the sequences failed to introduce new ideas the way the sequences did or didn’t stick in the community’s collective memory?
They introduced new ideas and failed to stick in the community memory. Why is not clear. (I could easily come up with just-so stories to retrospectively explain it, of course.)
One just-so story: The sequences are mentioned everywhere as The Way To Read Less Wrong; random archive posts are not. Therefore a larger fraction of LW has read the sequences.
Yeah, that’s the one that occurred to me too. The site is stuck in 2008. Even Eliezer doesn’t necessarily think the stuff he wrote word for word there any more.
Also the sequences are permalinked, one click away from the front page.