Nobody said that you don’t have the right to state your opinion. It was only said that the right place to state your opinion is at LW, not the LW wiki. It can then eventually find itself to the wiki if it gets sufficient support here.
It is a simple fact that very few people are following updates on the wiki, and in any case it’s less convenient to have a discussion over there. Moving the discussion to LW is a practical matter, a way of drawing more attention and feedback from the community.
It is a simple fact that very few people are following updates on the wiki
And, to elaborate on the implications of this… If someone writes bullshit on the wiki I will not have the chance to refute it unless I happen to look at it. Then people will go around treating the wiki like an authoritative source when it is actually less reliable than a discussion comment. Which is really damn annoying.
The wiki reflects views which have attained a high degree of consensus. Not complete consensus because yes then it would be empty. This is just because we’re such a bunch of argumentative contrarians.
If it helps, think of putting Eliezer in charge as a sort of Schelling point. We need some form of minimal authority structure, it might as well be the founder of the website.
Nobody said that you don’t have the right to state your opinion. It was only said that the right place to state your opinion is at LW, not the LW wiki. It can then eventually find itself to the wiki if it gets sufficient support here.
If that is true, then the LW wiki should be empty. What is currently on that page is someone else’s opinion.
If you mean to say that I have opinions, while other people have facts, how is it decided which people have facts and which merely have opinions?
Again: Why does one person have the right to edit a LW wiki article, while I do not?
It is a simple fact that very few people are following updates on the wiki, and in any case it’s less convenient to have a discussion over there. Moving the discussion to LW is a practical matter, a way of drawing more attention and feedback from the community.
And, to elaborate on the implications of this… If someone writes bullshit on the wiki I will not have the chance to refute it unless I happen to look at it. Then people will go around treating the wiki like an authoritative source when it is actually less reliable than a discussion comment. Which is really damn annoying.
The wiki reflects views which have attained a high degree of consensus. Not complete consensus because yes then it would be empty. This is just because we’re such a bunch of argumentative contrarians.
If it helps, think of putting Eliezer in charge as a sort of Schelling point. We need some form of minimal authority structure, it might as well be the founder of the website.