[jesterson]

Thank you! Was going to write something similar, but you have made it much better than I possibly could.

Given the incredible complexity of finding valuable information on Internet nowadays, having something like sharing resources you consume may be very useful for OP and also for everyone. This is just an idea, not sure if someone have already made it. If so, i am curious to know

[dredmorbius]

Reading lists / bibliographies are tremendously useful, if that's what you mean by sharing resources.

I'd include both traditional texts and online sources (references, podcasts / blogs, etc.) among those. I've written / shared a few myself.

Or do you have something else in mind?

[jesterson]

Something like that. Where would one find intelligent people exchanging their reading lists/bibliographies?

[dredmorbius]

Authors. In books.

Sometimes as bibliographies, sometimes as footnotes, sometimes mentioned in acknowledgements.

One form I find particularly useful though it's seldom used is a bibliographic note. The one by William Ophuls in Plato's Revenge was sufficiently useful that I typed it out (and added links to sources or names where possible) here:

<https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/6fgq8g/william...>

[dredmorbius]

Also, course syllabii, as mentioned in my first comment here.

Generally, I keep an eye (or ear) out for references which I think might prove interesting.

William Ophuls, mentioned previously, was mentioned in an aside during a seminar I was listening to (posted to YouTube from a university institute of interest). I think I spent a few hours replaying the clip and trying various search variations before I got the author's name right. As you might guess by my retyping his bibliographic note, I found his work to be fascinating in its own right, as well as an invaluable guide to other useful sources.

Books without bibliographies, footnotes, or endnotes lose a tremendous amount of value compared to those with. Unless a text is itself a significant primary source or original account this is largely inexcusable. You'll occasionally find reading lists compiled by others --- I've added, for example Gabriella Lim's bibliography to my own media and disinformation list. Hers is here: <https://citizenlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Disinformat...> (PDF)

Interest and advocacy groups or institutes will sometimes list references or recommended readings. Those can be worth exploring.

But in general, listen for mentions of authors, books, etc., in different contexts and follow up on those. If the same appear repeatedly, see if they're substantive or worth exploration (some are, some aren't). It doesn't hurt to note who's good at recommending worthwhile sources. And beware of biases --- I'll often do oppositional reading, looking for critics and refutations of various works. Sometimes those are valid, sometimes not. You'll often recognise with time what objections are common, which unusual, and whether or not they're substantive or specious.

Author's names or book titles themselves become useful search terms. If you're looking for a group discussing a specific author ... search that author's name. (Many such discussions ... are of poor quality. There are some exceptions.)

Ezra Klein closes his podcast interviews by asking for three book recommendations from the guest. That's an ... interesting and eclectic list. It's been compiled here: <https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.ht...>

[jesterson]

Thank you so much for detailed response. There's a lot to think of. Cheers