229 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined 31 Dec 2023 \ parent \ on: [meta] Any input to improve the ~econ territory? econ
Many of my posts include a related article, but also have some of my thoughts or questions that I want to discuss. What would that be for "affiliation"?
I don't think people are capable of being unbiased, so I don't find that tag very helpful. I'd be very skeptical of anyone claiming their content is unbiased.
Can you elaborate on what you're thinking with the "Political" type? I'm intrigued by how that would work and what it would do.
Some more options:
- Field: i.e. labor, macro, trade, etc.
- School: i.e. Austrian, Chicago, Marxist, etc.
- Theory | Empirical
If the linked content is not your own, then that tag would be unaffiliated. In that case, it would be fairly evident that the comment is your own. I view it more as a way to self disclose affiliation, eg. A person who links their own blog, and tags it accordingly, then thats cool.
Re: bias, yeah, you are right. Scratch that.
The political tag I was thinking about were more for posts which start to meander into solutions or policy direction/advocacy, or if submissions start dominating the latest popular political narratives...which is maybe premature, but I expect things to go that way.
I'm trying to think about how to get in front of ptoblems observed in other forums. The optionality is different at inception, than once something has matured. A fun experiment, imho.
reply
I'm torn on the "Politics" declaration.
On one hand, we can use it to safeguard against straw-manning, if we're using it to understand what people are actually arguing for and why.
On the other hand, I worry that it stacks the deck and detracts from the merits of an argument, by making people aware of the tribal affiliation.
reply
Fair.
reply