Discussion vs. Main customs have been settled since the beginning.
That’s very not true. I assume you mean “Since Discussion was added to the site”, since there was no Discussion section on Less Wrong for quite some time. Before Discussion was around, it was considered acceptable to post relevant links as articles, and Eliezer even said so explicitly.
After Discussion was introduced, it took some time to settle whether link posts still belonged on Main. Since Discussion was generally conceived as a place for posts that are not substantial enough to be Main posts, and single-link posts were already considered acceptable for Main, it was not immediately obvious that such posts belong in Discussion.
At the least, it’s absurd to think that any norms/customs regarding X have been settled since the beginning of X—it always takes some time.
I didn’t mean to imply just link posts where common at the start or anything like that. Considering your feedback I think the norms not being quite settled at first could well just be my projection.
I have read a lot of LessWrong articles, but to be honest I had a hard time deciding where to put my “hey you! why don’t you learn game theory?” post. I only settled on main after I asked a few LWers on the IRC channel about where to put it. Maybe I should have said “it can be hard to figure out the norms”.
Which reminds me… @Aurini: Consider adding [Link]: or [link] or something like that before the title.
I would say add [Video]: [Link] would perpetuate the misunderstanding that there may be no immediate content, [Video] correctly warns people who (for whatever reason) can’t easily view arguments in video format.
“Since the beginning”? I’ve been here longer than you, pal; I just don’t get off on the politics, and post rarely.
Don’t try and pull some contemporary social norm as Status; if I fucked up with my lack of description, tell me! I admitted my error, and corrected it; do you have a real complaint, or are you just trying to prove that your IQ is 2 inches longer than mine?
Yeah the whole Discussion vs. Main norms hadn’t settled down until relatively recently.
Discussion vs. Main customs have been settled since the beginning. It takes a lot to make a mere link post suitable for Main; it has been very rare.
That’s very not true. I assume you mean “Since Discussion was added to the site”, since there was no Discussion section on Less Wrong for quite some time. Before Discussion was around, it was considered acceptable to post relevant links as articles, and Eliezer even said so explicitly.
After Discussion was introduced, it took some time to settle whether link posts still belonged on Main. Since Discussion was generally conceived as a place for posts that are not substantial enough to be Main posts, and single-link posts were already considered acceptable for Main, it was not immediately obvious that such posts belong in Discussion.
At the least, it’s absurd to think that any norms/customs regarding X have been settled since the beginning of X—it always takes some time.
I didn’t mean to imply just link posts where common at the start or anything like that. Considering your feedback I think the norms not being quite settled at first could well just be my projection.
I have read a lot of LessWrong articles, but to be honest I had a hard time deciding where to put my “hey you! why don’t you learn game theory?” post. I only settled on main after I asked a few LWers on the IRC channel about where to put it. Maybe I should have said “it can be hard to figure out the norms”.
Which reminds me… @Aurini: Consider adding [Link]: or [link] or something like that before the title.
I would say add [Video]: [Link] would perpetuate the misunderstanding that there may be no immediate content, [Video] correctly warns people who (for whatever reason) can’t easily view arguments in video format.
Good idea.
“Since the beginning”? I’ve been here longer than you, pal; I just don’t get off on the politics, and post rarely.
Don’t try and pull some contemporary social norm as Status; if I fucked up with my lack of description, tell me! I admitted my error, and corrected it; do you have a real complaint, or are you just trying to prove that your IQ is 2 inches longer than mine?