From Lesswrongwiki
Revision as of 15:58, 18 March 2012 by Matt (talk | contribs) (agree on non-inclusion of 12 virtues)
Jump to: navigation, search

I've been trying to improve this about page in line with the suggestions I made in my recent discussion post, but User:Grognor has been reverting my edits. I'd like to work with Grognor to find a version of the page we both agree on. It would be great to hear other users weigh in on this issue. I don't see the downside of making my suggested changes; even if Grognor does not think cultish appearances are a problem, others like me do, and it seems like we ought to be able to find a way to write the about page that avoids them and is just as effective in other respects as the old about page.--John Maxwell IV 23:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop talking about me like I'm some kind of malevolent force that only wants to crush your dreams. Grognor 05:47, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I removed most of my references to you.--John Maxwell IV 06:50, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Man, let's just chill out and relax. The name of the game is Bold, Revert, Discuss, brother. You and Groggy need to talk about your feelings for a while. Then we can come to a consensus about the about page. Paper-machine 06:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

paper machine, what do you like about the virtues so much? If you look at this thread I linked to, there are several people expressing ambivalence about them. If you just want us to have a long about page, do you think you could replace the virtues with some other content? Also, wedrifed said he never liked the virtues page, with a cough... What else is that supposed to mean?

I have a lot of ideas for this page and I'd really like to rethink it from the ground up, but I'm not going to invest the time in that if even simple, apparently widely supported changes like this are reverted. Less wrong has a ton of great stuff in its archives, and I don't see any reason to immediately showcase a controversial piece. I don't object to linking to the virtues in a non-cultish way, but reproducing them entirely doesn't seem like the best use of space. Although really, ideally we would not mention them at all since they are not hosted on Less Wrong. This is the about page for Less Wrong, so we should showcase things that are written here. There are plenty of introductory pieces on this domain.--John Maxwell IV 06:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with JM4 on non-inclusion of the 12 Virtues. They are: 1. awesome; 2. unfortunately weird in this context (their weirdness works in other contexts); 3. inconveniently long in this context. --Matt 05:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)