A functionality I'd like to see on LessWrong: the ability to give quick feedback for a post in the same way you can react to comments (click for image). When you strong-upvote or strong-downvote a post, a little popup menu appears offering you some basic feedback options. The feedback is private and can only be seen by the author. 

I've often found myself drowning in downvotes or upvotes without knowing why. Karma is a one-dimensional measure, and writing public comments is a trivial inconvience: this is an attempt at middle ground, and I expect it to make post reception clearer. 

See below my crude diagrams.

Hi! I played around with your shortened Neil-prompt for an hour and feel like it definitely lost something relative to the original. 

I do quite appreciate this kind of experimentation and so far have made no attempt whatsoever at shortening my prompt, but I should get to doing that at some point. This is directionally correct! 

Thanks,

My own (tentative, rushed, improvised) system prompt is this one (long enough I put it in a Google doc; also allows for easy commenting if you have anything to say): 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d2haCywP-uIWpBiya-xtBRhbfHX3hA9fLBTwIz9oLqE/edit?usp=drivesdk

It's the longest one I've seen but works pretty well! It's been helpful for a few friends.

You can already do this! Just switch this from default to hidden according to the whim of the moment.

 

See also: 

https://borretti.me/article/how-i-use-claude

I was planning on putting a whole list here but alas I am drawing a blank. 

There's a lot of dispersed wisdom in @Zvi's stack too but I can't remember any sufficiently discriminatory key words to find them.

Can confirm. Half the LessWrong posts I've read in my life were read in the shower.

no one's getting a million dollars and an invitation the the beisutsukai 

honored.

This might be relevant

I like object-level posts that also aren't about AI. They're a minority on LW now, so they feel like high signals in a sea of noise. (That doesn't mean they're necessarily more signally, just that the rarity makes it seem that way to me.)