It was only said that the right place to state your opinion is at LW, not the LW wiki.

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?

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.

13Vladimir_Nesov9yIt 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.

Who owns LessWrong?

by PhilGoetz 1 min read29th Sep 201185 comments

7


The LessWrong wiki contains a biased and offensive entry on group selection.  I edited the wiki page, to append some points representing an opposing view at the end.  Eliezer removed my points, leaving only a link at the end.  He said he thought my points were wrong, but would not say which points he thought were wrong, or why he thought they were wrong.

Is it reasonable for me to restore my changes over Eliezer's edit, since he is unwilling to give reasons for his edit?  What sort of rights or privileges does Eliezer have over LW or LW wiki content?

(Please try not to turn this into a discussion of group selection.)

ADDED:  Please go meta, folks.  I am not trying to argue about this specific Wiki article.  I am not asking for redress.  Specifics about this wiki article are irrelevant.  I am asking whether this is still a benevolent dictatorship.

The relevant questions are not what the appropriate form of debate is, or anything about this wiki article.  The relevant questions are:

  • Who owns the domain?
  • Who created the Wiki?
  • Who owns the code?
  • Who pays for the servers?
  • If someone is in charge, what rights do they reserve for themselves?
  • At what point does the ratio of community contributions to Eliezer's contributions mean we have the right to claim some ownership?

The Wiki main page says, "The wiki about rationality that anyone who is logged in can edit".  Apparently that is a lie.  If I do not have as much right as Eliezer does to write a wiki post, I want that point explicitly spelled out.