After reading this FI email from Elliot, I decided to do a whole blog post analyzing what he said and how I should apply it to my speedrunning work.
Almost immediately I thought to do a bunch of work on this such that it would become many blog posts. So I decided to plan it all out. This blog post is the first of the series.
The below text won't make a lot of sense to you. I did not intend it to be understandable to other people. I was focussed on just recording my ideas. So it's mostly just brainstorming.
I've spent a few hours on this now and I think this is a good stopping point.
------------------------------------------
# Initial exploration re action plan for writing this blog post
- tree whole discussion[1] as part of reviewing speed running.
- consider making it a separate blog post instead.
- maybe write it as if it's one, then decide to separate it.
- (that's my usually process)
- how do all of Elliot's and my sentences fit into the following:
- for criticism to be effective, the following things need to be factored in:
- clear goals
- reasoning
- perspectives
- context
- problem-situation
- clear pass/fail criteria
- what would be a success? what would be a fail? can you tell the difference? if not, that's not good enough. there's room for improvement.
- METHODS to apply to the whole product of the action plan:
- only use grammar that I think I can analyze.
- make a custom API for this series of blog posts
- make it a separate blog post that I link at the start of each of the posts in the series
- say what things? what kind of criticism am I looking for?
- type: grammar mistakes. I'll treat them as leads to focus my grammar study.
- any criticism that you think I would find helpful
- even if it would require back and forth of 5 (5 from you and 5 from me) before I decide it's helpful or not
[1a] started from discussion with Elliot where he prompted me to answer questions about [forgot, fill in later]
[1b] had a thought train leading to "matrix style graphical figuring things out" (from earlier at least, not sure)
[1c] While thinking about this, I had a tangent thought train leading to "add learning goal, learn about cases where I do social dynamics - why? because sabotages rationality".
[1d] while thinking about this, I had a tangent thought train leading to "1 by 1, in order, like I did before in my FI personal notes -- see bottom of Operating System showing itemized history of thoughts during 2 hour thought train where every single thought was tracked and logged, where I said I'm rewriting my software."
[1e] recalling criticism of Lulie's post, external criticism can be improved to be well suited for the receiver.
[1f] not liking criticism = or ~= social dynamics at play, caring about your social status (in the eyes of a group or particular person, or self, as in self-esteem)
- why couldn't it be just lack of goal?
- why lack of goal? social dynamics?
- example: not wanting to state goal (like how I don't state goal of learning parenting as a subgoal of learn rationality)
- don't want to look dumb?
- what type of criticism don't I like?
- the kind I don't understand
- why don't you understand?
- maybe because you're not clear what the goal is?
- if so, you can fix that, like by asking the criticism-giver (and you could figure it out yourself without asking, depends on context)
[1g] ratio of criticism to content published/reviewed
- if high - then what? (depends on why high)
- if low - then what? (depends on why low)
No comments:
Post a Comment