One solution <nowiki>[</nowiki>to the problem that high status might cause stupidity<nowiki>]</nowiki> that might work (and I think has worked for me… - Wei Dai

This [the feeling that writing reviews of posts is work] is partly why I haven't done any reviews, despite feeling a vague moral obligation to do so. Another reason is that I wasn't super engaged with [LessWrong] throughout most of 2018 and few of the nominated posts jumped out at me (as something that I have a strong opinion about) from a skim of the titles, and the ones that did jump out at me I think I already commented on back when they were first posted and don't feel motivated to review them now. Maybe that's because I don't like to pass judgment (I don't think I've written a review for anything before) and when I first commented it was in the spirit of "here are some tentative thoughts I'm bringing up for discussion".

Does anyone not have any problems with taking ideas seriously? I think I'm in this category because ideas like cryonics, the Singularity, <nowiki>[</nowiki>unfriendly artificial intelligence<nowiki>]</nowiki>, and Tegmark's mathematical universe were all immediately obvious to me as ideas to take seriously, and I did so without much conscious effort or deliberation.

In other words, when I say "what's the evidence for that?", it's not that I don't trust your rationality (although of course I don't trust your rationality either), but I just can't deduce what evidence you must have observed from your probability declaration alone even if you were fully rational.