Dec 11, 2019
ssc
Read on
(unread)
Correction To Circumcision ACC
1 min
•
122 words
•
9 comments
Scott Alexander apologizes for changing an essay title about circumcision, which caused confusion about its content, and asks readers to consider the original title when voting.
Longer summary
Scott Alexander apologizes for changing the title of an essay on circumcision from 'Circumcision: Harms, Benefits, Ethics' to 'Is Circumcision Ethical?'. He explains that he wanted to maintain consistency in the format of titles, but this change caused confusion as it didn't accurately reflect the essay's content, which focused on harms and benefits as much as ethics. He asks readers to consider the original title when voting and invites other authors to provide feedback if they're unhappy with how he's phrased their titles.
Shorter summary
Recurring tags:
ethics (52),
adversarial collaboration (15),
writing (11),
reader feedback (7),
blog policy (6),
circumcision (4)
The original title of the essay was “Circumcision: Harms, Benefits, Ethics”. I wanted to have all the titles in the same format, as questions, so I titled my post “Is Circumcision Ethical?” Then lots of people got upset because the essay included focused on harms and benefits as much as (or more than) ethics.
This was totally my fault, not the fault of the authors. Sorry. For the sake of voting, please pretend the post had been titled “Circumcision: Harms, Benefits, Ethics”.
You can see my proposed titles for the other collaborations here; if any authors are unhappy with how I’ve phrased them, please let me know.
If you enjoy this fan website, you can support us over
here. Thanks a lot!
Loading...