FYI mods currently have the ability to restrict posts to logged-in-only, and to “people with accounts more than ~6 hours old” (this was originally meant mostly to handle drama threads that suddenly get linked in hackernews, but I do use it on capabilities-y posts). It seems probably reasonable to give other users the ability to toggle that setting.
Users can also currently share private-doc posts with other select users.
Setting up karma-gating seems reasonable as well, though not sure when we’ll get to it and I think “logged in” is pretty good as a filter.
I want to be able to send a post to a particular group of users that I don’t necessarily have to be in to post in; that way I can send news, commentary, etc, to a particular group, who can then vote on it using the normal mechanism. this would be for things that are potentially capabilities-advancing but which need fairly wide input; typically they’ll be unlikely to actually be capabilities advances, and typically they’ll be things that are already known and I simply don’t want to promote unless it’s in a reasonably closed group. “signed in users” is thoroughly insufficient, as anyone can make an account and bypass any restriction.
Also, can normal users please be able to set this please and thank you, I don’t want to wait around for moderators to realize that there’s a subtle way a clever capabilities person could see a resonance between ideas that makes a post a capabilities insight,
anyway, upvote and disagree, disagree aimed at “logged in pretty good” and “private doc posts [implied: are good enough]”: private-doc posts are sharpshooting, and I want a middle ground between that and logged-in posts. something where people who have some reasonable score on “actually trying at all to build cosmopolitan good”, not merely a score on saying nice stuff.
Eww. Author-controlled limits are horrifically exclusionary—if you’re not in my club, I don’t want to acknowledge that you’re on the site. IMO, If you don’t want it visible to the world (including /r/sneerclub and your local government), you probably shouldn’t publish it on an open forum. And LW should remain an open forum.
Perhaps for some topics, you’d prefer to discuss in a closed forum, or a non-forum where it can be end-to-end encrypted rather than just hard-to-discover, or in-person where it’s very hard to record or reference later. That’s fine—some things shouldn’t be said publicly.
Note that you CAN get some of this by sharing a draft with specified people. I very much hope it’s not common to do so and never end up with a publishable version.
Forum feature idea (inspired by the discussion here): Have posts be hidden except to specific groups, such as
by Karma (with threshold)
by specific users
by login status (site visitors can’t see, but logged in account can see)
by account age
FYI mods currently have the ability to restrict posts to logged-in-only, and to “people with accounts more than ~6 hours old” (this was originally meant mostly to handle drama threads that suddenly get linked in hackernews, but I do use it on capabilities-y posts). It seems probably reasonable to give other users the ability to toggle that setting.
Users can also currently share private-doc posts with other select users.
Setting up karma-gating seems reasonable as well, though not sure when we’ll get to it and I think “logged in” is pretty good as a filter.
I! want! group! lists!
I want to be able to send a post to a particular group of users that I don’t necessarily have to be in to post in; that way I can send news, commentary, etc, to a particular group, who can then vote on it using the normal mechanism. this would be for things that are potentially capabilities-advancing but which need fairly wide input; typically they’ll be unlikely to actually be capabilities advances, and typically they’ll be things that are already known and I simply don’t want to promote unless it’s in a reasonably closed group. “signed in users” is thoroughly insufficient, as anyone can make an account and bypass any restriction.
Also, can normal users please be able to set this please and thank you, I don’t want to wait around for moderators to realize that there’s a subtle way a clever capabilities person could see a resonance between ideas that makes a post a capabilities insight,
anyway, upvote and disagree, disagree aimed at “logged in pretty good” and “private doc posts [implied: are good enough]”: private-doc posts are sharpshooting, and I want a middle ground between that and logged-in posts. something where people who have some reasonable score on “actually trying at all to build cosmopolitan good”, not merely a score on saying nice stuff.
Eww. Author-controlled limits are horrifically exclusionary—if you’re not in my club, I don’t want to acknowledge that you’re on the site. IMO, If you don’t want it visible to the world (including /r/sneerclub and your local government), you probably shouldn’t publish it on an open forum. And LW should remain an open forum.
Perhaps for some topics, you’d prefer to discuss in a closed forum, or a non-forum where it can be end-to-end encrypted rather than just hard-to-discover, or in-person where it’s very hard to record or reference later. That’s fine—some things shouldn’t be said publicly.
Note that you CAN get some of this by sharing a draft with specified people. I very much hope it’s not common to do so and never end up with a publishable version.