So, I gotta ask. Did you intentionally, knowingly respond to “Why do people propose solutions before discussing the problem?” by proposing a bunch of solutions?
Cause I already made that joke, just sayin’.
Edit: Lemme put it this way: I propose the solution is that LWers simply don’t know how to discuss problems without proposing solutions.
Editedit: …Oh. Right. Oops.
Obvious mistake is obvious in retrospect, and frankly I should have extended a little more benefit of the doubt to Alicorn of all people. Er. Sorry?
A solution in this context refers to a proposed course of action to correct the problem. Alicorn’s answers are explanations for the problem, not solutions.
What JGWeissman and MinibearRex said. Be careful in tracking the recursion depth! Remember, there’s:
1) Prematurely proposing solutions 2) Discussing the various aspects of a problem before proposing solutions 3) Prematurely proposing solutions to the problem of 1) 4) Discussing the various aspects of the problem of 1) before proposing solutions thereto
Alicorn was on 4 (EDIT: or 2?), not 3 -- and 3 would have indeed been a bad idea.
Edit: Oops, this probably should have been posted as a direct reply to pedanterrific.
Alicorn didn’t actually propose solutions to the primary question: “What we should do in order to ensure that LWers discuss the problem thoroughly?” She proposed solutions to the sub question: “What mechanisms could cause people to propose solutions before discussing the problem?” I tend to view this process as a way of identifying the constraints on a problem before actually tackling the problem itself. If proposing constraints counts as something that we’re not allowed to do (until we establish the constraints on our constraints?), we wind up with an infinite recursion.
So, I gotta ask. Did you intentionally, knowingly respond to “Why do people propose solutions before discussing the problem?” by proposing a bunch of solutions?
Cause I already made that joke, just sayin’.
Edit: Lemme put it this way: I propose the solution is that LWers simply don’t know how to discuss problems without proposing solutions.
Editedit: …Oh. Right. Oops.
Obvious mistake is obvious in retrospect, and frankly I should have extended a little more benefit of the doubt to Alicorn of all people. Er. Sorry?
A solution in this context refers to a proposed course of action to correct the problem. Alicorn’s answers are explanations for the problem, not solutions.
What JGWeissman and MinibearRex said. Be careful in tracking the recursion depth! Remember, there’s:
1) Prematurely proposing solutions
2) Discussing the various aspects of a problem before proposing solutions
3) Prematurely proposing solutions to the problem of 1)
4) Discussing the various aspects of the problem of 1) before proposing solutions thereto
Alicorn was on 4 (EDIT: or 2?), not 3 -- and 3 would have indeed been a bad idea.
Edit: Oops, this probably should have been posted as a direct reply to pedanterrific.
Alicorn didn’t actually propose solutions to the primary question: “What we should do in order to ensure that LWers discuss the problem thoroughly?” She proposed solutions to the sub question: “What mechanisms could cause people to propose solutions before discussing the problem?” I tend to view this process as a way of identifying the constraints on a problem before actually tackling the problem itself. If proposing constraints counts as something that we’re not allowed to do (until we establish the constraints on our constraints?), we wind up with an infinite recursion.