I mean, among other things, *I’m* one of the people who’s disagreeing with someone(s), and a major issue is disagreement or confusion about what are even the right frames to be evaluating things through.
Why not randomize the default norms for each new user and observe which norms users tend to converge on over time?
I don’t currently expect that to really do anything. Most of the users doing any kind of deliberate norm setting are longtime users who are more bringing their own expectations of what they thought the norms already were, vs people reading the text we wrote in the moderation guidelines.
Find a person or people you both respect with relevant expertise. Do a formal debate where you both present your case. Choose a timed debate format so things can’t take forever. At the end, agree to abide by the judgement of the debate audience (majority vote if necessary).
Figure out whose vision for LessWrong is least like Facebook and implement that vision. The person whose vision is more similar to Facebook can just stay on Facebook.
I mean, among other things, *I’m* one of the people who’s disagreeing with someone(s), and a major issue is disagreement or confusion about what are even the right frames to be evaluating things through.
I don’t currently expect that to really do anything. Most of the users doing any kind of deliberate norm setting are longtime users who are more bringing their own expectations of what they thought the norms already were, vs people reading the text we wrote in the moderation guidelines.
Hm. More ideas which probably won’t help:
Find a person or people you both respect with relevant expertise. Do a formal debate where you both present your case. Choose a timed debate format so things can’t take forever. At the end, agree to abide by the judgement of the debate audience (majority vote if necessary).
Figure out whose vision for LessWrong is least like Facebook and implement that vision. The person whose vision is more similar to Facebook can just stay on Facebook.