A while back I reviewed A Map that Reflects the Territory which is a collection of essays posted on the lesswrong forum. My review is here. I posted it to both this blog and to the lesswrong forum. In both cases I posted a link to it. My post to lesswrong is here
On the lesswrong post many of the comments, plus some private emails, told me NO BILL- don't post a link, post it directly as text. It was not clear how to do that, but I got it done with help.
On complexity blog nobody commented that this was a problem. Then again, nobody commented at all, so its not clear what to make of that.
Meta Question: Is posting a link worse than posting direct text? Note that the book review was 12 pages long and looked great in LaTeX.
Meta Question: Why did lesswrong care about the format but complexityblog did not (Probably answer: omplexityblog readers did not care at all, whereas Lesswrong cared about what I though about Lesswrong)
Another Question, not Meta. One of the comments was (I paraphrase)
When I open a pdf file I expected to see something in the style of an academic paper. This is written in very much chatty, free-flowing blog post style with jokes like calling neologisms ``newords'', so the whole think felt more off-kilter than was intended. The style of writing would prob work better as an HTML blog post (which could then be posted directly as a Lesswrong post here instead of hosted elsewhere and linked.)
I think its interesting that the format of an article telegraphs (in this case incorrectly) what type of article it will be. Is this a common problem? I have had the experience of reading a real academic paper and being surprised that some joke or cultural-reference is in it, though I do not object to this.
Another comment and question
I was surprised the post only had 11 karma when I saw it (William had send me an advance copy and I'd really liked reading it) but when I saw that it was a link post, I understood why.
I find this hilarious- they have some way the posts are rated! For one, Lance told me very early on to never worry about comments, and I don't. Second, it reminds me of the Black Mirror episode Nosedive.
ANYWAY, I have reviewed another collection of essays for less wrong, this one called The Engines of Cognition. I am posting it here as a link: here and I will post it on lesswrong as full text (with help) in a few days.
I am posting it so I can get comments before I submit it to the SIGACT News book review column. But this is odd since I think this blog has more readers than SIGACT news has subscribers, so perhaps THIS is its real debut, not that. And of course the lesswrong forum is a place where more will read it since its about them.
So- I appreciate comments to make it a better review!