Google Doc | Author: Mati Roy | Created: 2019-12-04 | Updated: 2019-12-04 | Published: 2019-12-04 | Status: draft | Acknowledgement: I think I was mostly inspired by Gwern to do this.
Author(s): name of the major contributors of the post
Acknowledgement: names of people having helped me with the post
Status: draft, incomplete, complete, etc.
Quality: quality of the article according to me
Importance: between 1 and 10 where 10 is most important
Confidence: how confident I am about the article; ex.: idea, list, speculative, tentative, confident, fictional; sometimes I also use “epistemic status”
Created: date I created the file
Branched: same as “created” but mentions that the initial text was copied from another file
Updated: last date the file was updated
Published: date I published the article on my website
Feedback: feedback is always welcomed, but sometimes I’d espetially like feedback so mention it
Disclaimer: not sure how useful those are, but sometimes feel like I have to let people know that I’m not giving professional advice
Content warnings: I haven’t used them yet; I know some people like them and other not; I think ideally everyone could decide whether they want them
Prerequisites: knowledge that should be acquired before reading the article
Follow up to: links to related articles that came up before it
Probabilities
If It’s Worth Doing, It’s Worth Doing With Made-Up Statistics.
“Sometimes pulling numbers out of your arse and using them to make a decision is better than pulling a decision out of your arse.” -ciphergoth
Caveats
Notably, for a lot of articles: Your Mileage May Vary; also related: Other-optimizing
Criticism
Links to the best criticism of the idea described in the article