I would urge you to seek feedback from a more diverse crowd then.
The article talks about counterexamples. It's hubris to think you will find most of the relevant counterexamples on your own. It's also hubris to think you'll do it quicker than others.
As for scalability, I'm confused. If you have a crowd of followers, for example, you'll reach lots of people quickly, whereas by writing for yourself you'll never get feedback from more than one person. It's the perfect example of something that doesn't scale.
Heck even writing a comment on HN often leads to more efficient feedback. Sure, I probably could have thought of everything other commenters point out to me, but it would take much more time and effort, and the effort does not lead to a vastly better understanding. At best only marginally better.
Past a point you're in the zone of diminishing returns. You can spend two hours and get a 5% better understanding or you can talk to someone and in ten minutes get a 20% better understanding.
That's a big if, and that's the problem with relying on feedback. The more specific the topic, the less people you'll find that can give relevant feedback. Even within a team (less people but more specialized in your problem domain), it can be difficult to get relevant feedback.
It still works because it is a form of "rubber-ducking". But the less involved in your topic the "crowd" is, the less efficient it is.
Moreover feedback has the same problem as tests (and code reviews): it can show the existence of an inconsistency or a blind spot, but positive feedback doesn't prove that you are entirely correct.
> positive feedback doesn't prove that you are entirely correct
You often don’t need to be 100% sure that everything is correct before you move from “writing notes” to “doing something”. At that point, I find that note-taking becomes counter-productive because of the time it requires.
I say this as an avid note taker myself: I’ve often caught myself procrastinating by polishing my notes 100%, instead of moving on and getting things done.
Keep in mind that the topic is thinking in writing (vs "volatile" thinking).I average 25-30 notes per day. Even if I'd ignore it's relatively specialized math and CS, it would take a rather large crowd to review and a lot of context. Meanwhile, like with coding, writing and re-reading notes forces your mind to lay out things with more structure, often uncovering loose ends.
I agree that public forum like HN/Reddit is a good, scalable way to review (some) ideas, but it works for a fraction.
