[copied from the talk page before structured discussions were set up]

I think some of your example Open Questions should be removed or changed significantly.

> Did Trump actually want to be president or was he running for president for publicity? "actually want" here is poorly defined enough to make the distinction here meaningless.

> How do we know which media to trust? What if no media are trustworthy? (Not purely hypothetical, I think this answer might be closest to the truth.)

> Is wealth inequality bad? Assuming all-else is equal? Or considering the overall impacts of policies that lead to reduced inequality?

ya those are all good points. If you can't think of better wordings for the questions, I think its probably worth adding those points as sub-bullet points on the page itself Mjkurrels (talk) 00:53, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Thinking about some of these reminds me about how hard it is to ask a good, decidable question - something that is also clear in prediction markets where folks spend *a lot* of time trying to find unambiguous phrasings for their questions and regularly fail in spite of that.

Ya, it's tough to ask questions well. That's part of why I think the standard Q&A sites don't work so well, because the person who originally asks the question is the only person who gets to decide how it's asked. I think it's important to try and get the exact wording of the question as good as you can make it, but the actual page that discusses the question should be able to provide clarifying details as well. Mjkurrels (talk) 00:53, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Start a new topic on Talk:Main Page

Navigation menu

Search