We're excited to announce the Forecasting Wiki, the (future) go-to place for all information related to forecasting.
The goal of this wiki is to become a comprehensive repository that collects our shared knowledge on forecasting. We aim at a broad audience, ranging from newcomers who want to learn about forecasting and how they can improve to forecasting researchers who are looking for up to date research information.
At the moment we are just getting things of the ground. We will have a first meetup on Sunday, April 24 at 6pm CET / 5pm UK time / 12pm Eastern Time and are happy about everyone who would like to join us.
When you go to the wiki main page you will find
- the zoom link to the meetup
- an invite to our Discord channel
- Information on how to join our mailing list
- a link to our gather town workplace
We're looking forward to building the Forecasting Wiki together with you!
Given that wikis benefit so much from critical mass, is there a reason not to just include this content on Wikipedia? Or have you considered merging with the EA Wiki under a broader banner? EA and forecasting, alongside progress studies and the rationalists, can all be viewed as part of a new enlightenment type idea.
Nikos and I spoke about the possibility of having the Forecasting Wiki as part of the EA Wiki, but we concluded that the planned articles were just too specific for our wiki, and decided that it made more sense for the Forecasting Wiki to launch as a separate project. It would, however, be nice to explore ways to merge forecasting, rationalist and EA content in some sort of meta-wiki.
I agree with this, the success rate for wikis appears to be fairly low, at least in my anecdotal experience: who has read articles on the Cause Priorization wiki or the LessDead wiki or the LessWrong wiki? Even the EA forum wiki or the LessWrong tags are barely read or updated (perhaps a merge of the two would be helpful?).
Unfortunately, the wildest inclusionists have lost, so we can't just put everything onto Wikipedia, which would be the best option.
Good content gathers dust on those isolated wikis, sadly.
Unrelated, but one story for why the new enlightenment groups have been so successful is that they draw on people with really high (>3SD) interest in analytic reasoning, and traits like WEIRD and systematising have increased over time, so there are now way more >3SD people, among leaders and billionaires especially, enabling fast growth.