True Causes
ZH
← 大厅
7/7 · 行动
30 人 · 35 个想法
点击任意已完成的阶段进行查看
✓
提出
✓
澄清
✓
归类
✓
选择
✓
结构
✓
地图
7
行动
演示 · 不计入
障碍 · 持有链接的任何人 · 公开列出 · 已开启联盟
主持人:它的主持人(已封存)
30 人 · 35 个想法 · 2 个小组 · 3 个房间 已结成联盟
通行证 → · 逻辑 → · 记录
↗ 分享这张地图
在其他网站上,作为实时地图:
作为图片: https://truecauses.org/d/e74d06f/map.svg
作为数据: 本房间每一个已判断的卡片对(CSV). 每个主张都有自己的地址 /c/e74d06f/<card>,列在地图下方。
发布时请注明出处: Causal map: True Causes, https://truecauses.org/d/e74d06f
问题

Why does a lie travel further than the truth?

提出该做什么,再判断每项行动能否撼动每个根源。

封存于 9 天前:这个房间已不再知道谁曾在其中;只有主持人仍然留名。它得出的结论保留。
30 人在座 (其中 29 名为模拟成员) · 针对 6 个根本原因已提出 3 项行动。添加一项,然后判断每项行动能否撼动每个原因。
正以访客身份查看。输入用户名即可加入并参与。
先给根本原因打分
为什么
本方法自身的做法,在提出任何行动之前:每个根本原因按 1–5 分打分——解决它的可行性有多高、解决它会带来多大影响、不加干预它自行解决的可能性有多大。优先考虑影响大、可行性高、自行解决可能性低的根源——优先级 = 影响 + 可行性 − 可能性。分数在小组内取平均,并显示有多少人打了分。
1 = 低,5 = 高。这是你自己的分数;旁边是小组的平均分。
根本原因可行性影响自行解决优先级
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along––––
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline––––
The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public––––
Once labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes––––
The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association––––
Institutions investigate themselves and find nothing––––
每项行动能撼动每个根本原因吗?
竖列:大家提出的行动。横行:地图找出的根本原因。每个格子都是对一个问题的一次投票——这项行动能否显著减少那个原因?一方必须达到所投票数的 75% 才算定下;达不到,格子就保持分裂。 每个格子显示其投票分布——是 / 更糟 / 否——当其中一项达到四分之三时,该格子就定下了。
为什么
以所投票数的 75% 定下,和这里的其他所有问题一样。分裂表示有人投了票,但没有一方达到这个标准——这是一个结果,不是排队等待,它会一直保持分裂,直到足够多的人改变主意。没有人定下的格子保持未定;它永远不会变成否。逐对单独判断,能防止一项受欢迎的行动被记上它根本没触及的功劳。
行动根本原因 · 左边的行动能减少它吗?
Each revision is announced as if it were the position all alongPeer review is three unpaid people on a deadlineThe reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the publicOnce labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changesThe few outside are dismissed as cranks by associationInstitutions investigate themselves and find nothing
Fund replication as a standing line, not a project 讨论✗ 不,不能
4 是 / 0 更糟 / 25 否
✓ 是,它能减少这一项
25 是 / 0 更糟 / 4 否
尚未确定
✓ 是,它能减少这一项
25 是 / 0 更糟 / 4 否
✗ 不,不能
2 是 / 0 更糟 / 27 否
尚未确定
Data released with the claim, or the claim carries a warning 讨论✓ 是,它能减少这一项
23 是 / 0 更糟 / 6 否
✗ 不,不能
3 是 / 0 更糟 / 26 否
尚未确定
✗ 不,不能
4 是 / 0 更糟 / 25 否
✗ 不,不能
5 是 / 0 更糟 / 24 否
尚未确定
A public register of every official claim and every later revision 讨论✗ 不,不能
3 是 / 0 更糟 / 26 否
✓ 是,它能减少这一项
24 是 / 0 更糟 / 5 否
尚未确定
✗ 不,不能
2 是 / 0 更糟 / 27 否
✓ 是,它能减少这一项
26 是 / 0 更糟 / 3 否
尚未确定
目前杠杆作用最大
Fund replication as a standing line, not a project 减少了 6 个根本原因中的 2 个
A public register of every official claim and every later revision 减少了 6 个根本原因中的 2 个
Data released with the claim, or the claim carries a warning 减少了 6 个根本原因中的 1 个
地图上的行动
显示的是房间判断过的所有行动:它直接作用于 6 个根本原因中的 4 个。 有 2 个没有直接作用。
只依据房间在行动阶段定下的格子,别无其他。绿色的根本原因至少被所显示行动中的一项减轻;灰色的,没有一项直接作用于它;红色边框表示其中某项会使它更糟。
Peer review is three unpaid people on a deadline → A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funderPeer review is three unpaid people on a deadline → The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the publicThere is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed early → So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of itThe bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check it → A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changedInstitutions investigate themselves and find nothing → There is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed earlyInstitutions investigate themselves and find nothing → A genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distanceNobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revised → Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supportedOnce labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes → Being wrong in public costs an institution more than being slowThe reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the public → Institutions investigate themselves and find nothingThe few outside are dismissed as cranks by association → The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check itEach revision is announced as if it were the position all along → A researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funderEach revision is announced as if it were the position all along → The reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the publicBeing wrong in public costs an institution more than being slow → A correction arrives long after the decision it should have changedA correction arrives long after the decision it should have changed → Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at allA genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distance → So institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of itPeer review is three unpaid people on a deadline ① Fund replication as a standing line, not a project ③ A public register of every official claim and every later revisionPeer review is three unpaidpeople on a deadline①③所显示的行动对这个根本原因的作用2 项行动减轻它Nobody keeps a public record of which official claims were later revisedNobody keeps a publicrecord of which officialclaims were later revisedOnce labelled, a claim cannot get a hearing even when the evidence changes ① Fund replication as a standing line, not a projectOnce labelled, a claimcannot get a hearing evenwhen the evidence changes①所显示的行动对这个根本原因的作用1 项行动减轻它The few outside are dismissed as cranks by association ③ A public register of every official claim and every later revisionThe few outside aredismissed as cranks byassociation③所显示的行动对这个根本原因的作用1 项行动减轻它Each revision is announced as if it were the position all along ② Data released with the claim, or the claim carries a warningEach revision is announcedas if it were the positionall along②所显示的行动对这个根本原因的作用1 项行动减轻它The bodies that issue guidance also fund those who check itThe bodies that issueguidance also fund thosewho check itA researcher who audits a funder's work loses the funderA researcher who audits afunder's work loses thefunderBeing wrong in public costs an institution more than being slowBeing wrong in public costsan institution more thanbeing slowThe reply is that release would be misinterpreted by the publicThe reply is that releasewould be misinterpreted bythe public所显示的行动对这个根本原因的作用没有行动直接作用于它Guidance was stated more confidently than the evidence supportedGuidance was stated moreconfidently than theevidence supportedA correction arrives long after the decision it should have changedA correction arrives longafter the decision itshould have changedInstitutions investigate themselves and find nothingInstitutions investigatethemselves and find nothing所显示的行动对这个根本原因的作用没有行动直接作用于它Requests for data are answered eighteen months later, if at allRequests for data areanswered eighteen monthslater, if at allA genuine critic and a bad-faith one look identical from a distanceA genuine critic and abad-faith one lookidentical from a distanceThere is no body whose job is to be wrong-footed earlyThere is no body whose jobis to be wrong-footed earlySo institutions treat all criticism as one category and answer none of itSo institutions treat allcriticism as one categoryand answer none of it
地图上的每个编号标出该行动所减轻的一个根本原因。
① Fund replication as a standing line, not a project
② Data released with the claim, or the claim carries a warning
③ A public register of every official claim and every later revision
从行动到方案
表格对每项行动是单独判断的。方案是房间会一起执行的一组行动。
成员用能减轻某个根本原因的行动组合出方案,房间再像判断其他一切那样,把方案两两比较,以所投票数的四分之三为准。每个方案都显示它直接作用于哪些根本原因、哪些没有、又使哪些更糟。
主持人可以开启方案比较。
我们预期接下来会发生什么
关于各项行动的预测:每项应改变什么、如何衡量、何时检查。到了那一天,曾在房间里的某个人会在旁边写下实际发生了什么。
为什么
地图说明哪些行动能撼动哪些原因。它不说明是否有人做了这些行动,也不说明是否有什么改变了。这里的每一条都是一项预测,带有日期和要衡量的东西,在地图定下后写成。日期到了,实际发生的情况会写在旁边,而预测保持原样:错误的预测才是有用的那种。没有人对这些投过票,它也不改变房间发现的任何东西。
到期:22 Jun 2027
行动A public register of every official claim and every later revision
预期a changed claim leaves a trace anyone can follow
衡量指标% of revisions logged publicly within a week
估计房间:42(15 人的中位数,范围 15 到 70)