The MESS of knowing what is what ... GG is poison ...

[TiddlyTweeter]

TW is in its Golden Age.

The sheer volume of solutions is amazing!

But will you find them tomorrow? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLA7sanwnN8

---

I'm busy and not able to read here daily. Its interestingly proved a nightmare reading this group after a few days. So much richness at a whim of Google.

---

I think we are throwing away through Google Groups DECENT CONTINUITY. 

What we have is genius innovators. Some neglected. Some triumphant. Few able to collectivize for common good.

NO mechanism here for that. 

Leverage is worked against by system.

TT

thoughts, again.

[Mat]

How about a federated network of tiddlywikis where people collectively add content to their own wikis and you have a plugin to roam the network to collect the tiddlers you're interested in (e.g by tag or by @mentions). You'd specify which wikis you want to roam (to "subscribe" to) and you'd find/locate them to begin with thanks to a few central servers that people report their wikis to as public, and provide a description about them. 

Discussions would be threads similar to in google groups but consisting of threaded tiddlers. Similarly, individual tiddlers could become "threads" with meta data, e.g plugins could have comments, ratings etc and you could opt to import as you import the plugin. Or, maybe you just want the meta tiddlers in order to decide if you want the plugin at all. 

Just an idea ;-)

(P.S for the newbies: I'm being ironic here. What I'm describing is something we refer to as a federation of wikis, or the "TWederation", which is the messianic age for TW that we're all praying for... )

<:-)

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi TiddlyTweeter

I'm busy and not able to read here daily. Its interestingly proved a nightmare reading this group after a few days. So much richness at a whim of Google.

Is there are any community software that doesn't have the problem that it's hard to catch up with a large volume of posts? Does Reddit or Hacker News do it any better? I would struggle to envisage any software features that could significantly improve the situation. I believe the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces. I don't see any evidence that that is particularly easy to automate; it takes human commitment and skill to do it. Dave's ToolMap and Mohammad's TWScripts demonstrate how effective and how difficult it is. It's hard to imagine software that could reconstruct either of those resources from the raw discussion traffic.

Best wishes

Jeremy.

[Mat]

Jeremy Ruston wrote:

Is there are any community software that doesn't have the problem that it's hard to catch up with a large volume of posts?

I agree but in our case the posts here, partially also serve as the repository for (links to) plugins and other solutions. We kind of mix meta with data. That is probably not the case in most other software communities. 

 

I believe the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces. I don't see any evidence that that is particularly easy to automate; it takes human commitment and skill to do it.

Agreed - BUT, like we learnt from Wikipedia, with the right infrastructure it is possible to collectively, and over time, create something huge. This would be absolutely impossible to create as an individual. Dave's and Mohammad's fantastic sites are fragile in the sense that they totally rely on single individuals and the information automatically decays over time. So far, over the past 15 years, ALL such individual and heart felt attempts have failed. IMO the only way out is to automate as much as possible and provide an infrastructure where anyone can chip in just a little pin to the ant stack at a time. A federated structure with redundancy would give added protection (lesson from TiddlySpace). It might fail, but Wikipedia didn't and for a lasting solution I just don't see ANY other believable alternative.

<:-)

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Mat

Jeremy Ruston wrote:

Is there are any community software that doesn't have the problem that it's hard to catch up with a large volume of posts?

I agree but in our case the posts here, partially also serve as the repository for (links to) plugins and other solutions. We kind of mix meta with data. That is probably not the case in most other software communities. 

Exactly. We’re expecting Google Groups to serve a function that it wasn’t designed for. But this discussion is framed as “let’s leave Google Groups and use something else instead” but that wont solve the problem.

 

I believe the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces. I don't see any evidence that that is particularly easy to automate; it takes human commitment and skill to do it.

Agreed - BUT, like we learnt from Wikipedia, with the right infrastructure it is possible to collectively, and over time, create something huge. This would be absolutely impossible to create as an individual. Dave's and Mohammad's fantastic sites are fragile in the sense that they totally rely on single individuals and the information automatically decays over time. So far, over the past 15 years, ALL such individual and heart felt attempts have failed. IMO the only way out is to automate as much as possible and provide an infrastructure where anyone can chip in just a little pin to the ant stack at a time. A federated structure with redundancy would give added protection (lesson from TiddlySpace). It might fail, but Wikipedia didn't and for a lasting solution I just don't see ANY other believable alternative.

Right, I think we’re agreeing. We need infrastructure to support those curatorial efforts, but my point is that that infrastructure is completely different from the infrastructure needed to support discussions, and so replacing our discussion infrastructure isn’t the right place to start.

Best wishes

Jeremy

<:-)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/d140b904-cab9-4a2a-b57b-12156a08e521%40googlegroups.com.

[Mat]

Jeremy Ruston wrote:

Right, I think we’re agreeing. We need infrastructure to support those curatorial efforts, but my point is that that infrastructure is completely different from the infrastructure needed to support discussions, and so replacing our discussion infrastructure isn’t the right place to start.

Hm, GG is good for ephemeral discussions. But because the discussions here are really about very technical problems in using the software, they often contain snips that would make sense to save, as evidenced by e.g Mohammads work. But the very manual curation such efforts demand is the big problem. We do need some infrastructure for e.g plugins but we would also benefit from a knowledge base more comparable to e.g Wikipedia (including it's article discussions) where the whole community can gradually add to from the discussions in a semi-automatic way. The ideal might be if the discussion software featured a way to mark out (tag?) posts/segments so they become part of a curated body (that can be fine edited "later"). Tagging and quality-rating is almost painless. This would be overkill for most software discussions but for a multi faceted animal like TW where people have totally varied needs and knowledge levels, I think it would make sense.

<:-)

[Mohammad]

On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 2:35:56 PM UTC+4:30, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

Hi TiddlyTweeter

I'm busy and not able to read here daily. Its interestingly proved a nightmare reading this group after a few days. So much richness at a whim of Google.

Is there are any community software that doesn't have the problem that it's hard to catch up with a large volume of posts? Does Reddit or Hacker News do it any better? I would struggle to envisage any software features that could significantly improve the situation. I believe the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces. I don't see any evidence that that is particularly easy to automate; it takes human commitment and skill to do it. Dave's ToolMap and Mohammad's TWScripts demonstrate how effective and how difficult it is. It's hard to imagine

In TW-Scripts the time and my limited knowledge on some aspects of TW are two main restriction for timely update!

[Sylvain Naudin]

I believe the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces.

Yes ! I'm also 200% convinced about that.

Where I agree with the feeling of TiddlyTweeter (I suppose) is in not being able to do it from this communication tool for the community.

I would struggle to envisage any software features that could significantly improve the situation.

Even if Google hasn't totally abandoned Groups (an update should come one day, there's a beta phase for the G Suite), it's not the ideal tool to perform these moderation tasks.

A proper forum do. In my opinion there are not many solutions. Discourse is one of them.

The wiki function, for example, would be very useful to keep precious tips and tricks that get lost. A silly thing but to be able to like posts is already feedback without necessarily overloading our mailboxes.

To have real categories, while still keeping the possibility to answer by email (I admit I never set it up).

But where Google does all the work and for free, you need indeed a dedicated server, which means money even if it is possible on affordable server, and not just one person to do it.

I have the experience of 5 years with the French community. It's easy for me because it doesn't cost me a lot (3.59€ per month) and there is not a big stake to do it alone. If I were to disappear, it wouldn't be the end of the world. And since there are few exchanges, I don't need a paid email solution, which would be different here.

On the other hand, it's necessarily different here, hence the fact of mutualizing the risks, which many free software communities manage to do.

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Jeremy

In a way I was overstating. Venting pure frustration at the difficultly at sifting voluminous posts with a fork, not a system. You get my point?

The issue is EVERY POST becomes a singular. I'll comment on that later.

I think it instances a real difficulty.

Right now I'm trying to understand, test, apply, and, ultimately, use some of the recent (three months or so) innovations on using EDIT differently.

That matters most to me. Writing is work I do. TW editor can be leveraged better, but you need look at solutions and sift them.

That is the background. Many relevant innovations, but its one-by-one stumbling to get there right now.

The CONTRADICTION is I'm now more of less able to understand innovation in TW--BUT find myself back on square one after a few days just being able to review.

I see a forest, when trees woudl be workable

This is not yet a proper answer. A dopo. Subito.

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Jeremy

Good post I thought about and looked at. This is my boiled down version in reply ...

1 - The internal search mechanism in GG sucks. I had thought to isolate "all but only" through it for a fortnight. Its still off by a big margin. I can find no way via search to reliably return posts about editing (my current interest). For reasons I don't know search in GG is often different that in GG search main.

2 - I do like ideas of curation, exact, reliable tagging etc. But aware its labour. The specific issue here is that the posts are OFTEN somewhat ahead of a classification. What I mean is that TW, currently, is not easily systematized. I think that compounds the issue.

(1), would likely be done better in other online systems. Though I have not tested that.

(2), Is interestingly iluminative; perhaps broadly doable with folk who grasp the basic parameters.

Best wishes

TT

On Sunday, 3 May 2020 12:05:56 UTC+2, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

[PMario]

Hi,

If I do find something interesting to remember, I use the "star" to mark it as "Starred". It can be my own replies, which I always mark _if_ they contain code or an attachment.

Or I do star comments from others, which I think, I should be able to remember.

The GG web UI have a selector in the left sidebar: Starred, which will only list, threads, that I did mark.

So it's possible to find stuff, that I'm interested in. ... From time to time I do scroll down this list, until I find my first "starred" post, quite some time back to 2013 or 14

have fun!

mario

[Mark S.]

You mentioned this before -- why do I keep forgetting? I need to star this ;-)

TT is trying to search for a concept: Editing. Unfortunately, almost every post is going to have terms relating to editing. Only if someone took the time to tag the item would "Editing" stand out as a semantic object.

If TT had been looking for a strudel recipe, he would have had better luck.

I don't think it would be any different with any other forum.

[Anne-Laure Le Cunff]

I may be old school but I kind of like Google Groups. I find it pretty easy to search through past messages and I also use the "start" function. That being said, having a pinned message with most commonly asked questions linking to corresponding thread with solution could be useful—but not sure it can be collectively maintained.

[TiddlyTweeter]

Mark S. wrote:

 

TT is trying to search for a concept: Editing. Unfortunately, almost every post is going to have terms relating to editing. Only if someone took the time to tag the item would "Editing" stand out as a semantic object.

If TT had been looking for a strudel recipe, he would have had better luck.

Right.

A compounding factor is the G Groups search doesn't seem to have decent Heuristics.

So an issue of IF this is a specific GG find issue peculiar to it?

I'd need test and compare.

It may be that part of the (my) issue here is much to do with "The Devil Is In The Details". 

(p.s. I simply can't believe that all different forum search systems are equivalent.)

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

Anne-Laure Le Cunff wrote:

I may be old school but I kind of like Google Groups.

Me too.

GG is a continuation of Usenet & Listserv. Both remain good. But GG hasn't evolved either much and has little incentive to do so.

Its good for immediate use. Very good for following simple flow.

My OP is about how to isolate a sub-set of flow lacking obligatory tagging on the "Editing" innovations in process I have no time to individually note.

Could you (one, not targeting you ! :) find a way to isolate via search "ALL BUT ONLY" posts about innovations in "editing" mechanics over the last few weeks?

That is my query.

Best wishes

TT

[Birthe C]

TT,

I am a simpleton. I use a dedicated tiddlywiki, open i the browser tab next to the one I use to read the Google Group. Then I bookmark the things I find interesting right now in that TW. But of course I do not always read everything or do not really have the interest for a special matter right at THAT point.

Often I use Tiddlyclip for that. Fast and the bookmark tagged as I know will fit in my wiki.

Birthe

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Birthe

Right. Good approaches.Similar to PMario.

But its just, right now, I am not here so much so I CAN'T READ any post. Saving or Fav is not possible.

The issue is finding relevant things ("all but only") when you been away a time.

At the moment I'm very interested in innovation on "editing" in TW and following that specifically. I finding it difficult.

The traffic here is getting higher. Tracking an interest well is not easy. The volume of posts is larger.

The OP is wondering about whether there is a way to auto-track relevant themes without having to audit everything.

But TX for your post.

TT

[Sarath Addanki]

thinking out loud..Leverage github

Following can be done:

have discussions via github issues

Tags can be added to categorize discussions like announcements, plugins, design

Issues can be pinned as well.

Issues/discussions can be searched with flexible syntax 

Sort discussions by Newest, Oldest, Most commented, Least commented, recently updated

Users can mute/subscribe to the interested topics.

Issues can start with templates, markdown syntax, quick todo items.

Issues can be added to projects, milestones. Converting into actions.

Github Actions allows to do some automations behind the scenes as well.

Github wiki allows to collaboratively maintain plugin wikis as well.

Github is widely accepted between techies and no entry barrier issues

Cost of maintaining is zero.

It will be maintained by collaborators, less worry of failing in long run.

Comes with an api for selective dumping of issues somewhere else as well.

As i'm writing this, I felt more convinced to use github. Having a single place(source of truth) to collaborate will enhance productivity and quality and rapid development

Thanks

Sarath A

[Birthe C]

I think the programmers in this group are on github, Many in this group are not programmers, they are end users. Now programmers are on Github, there is also the TiddlyWikiDev group.

Birthe

[Sarath Addanki]

Same can be said regarding google groups as well. GG requires gmail account. and, though not majority, but many have icloud(part of apple ecosystem) accounts. GG isn't that popular among non-techie users as well. I'm guessing majority of end users of TiddlyWiki have some techie skills.

I can relate to TiddlyTweeter points, search capability at GG is below par. Important discussions get's lost in hundreds of messages. 

Less collaboration on plugins. In my opinion, leveraging a better tool for development and collaboration will take TiddlyWiki efforts to the next level.

I'm willing to volunteer to transition to Github

Thanks!

[Peter Buyze]

Birthe,

Github is not for programmers only. I have a number of programs on my computer and issues are addressed via Github, so I have a Github account even though I am not a programmer, as you know.

--

Securely sent with Tutanota. Get your own encrypted, ad-free mailbox:

https://tutanota.com

9 May 2020, 20:58 by strikke...@gmail.com:

I think the programmers in this group are on github, Many in this group are not programmers, they are end users. Now programmers are on Github, there is also the TiddlyWikiDev group.

Birthe

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f2836411-be20-46d0-8f32-1d471583905c%40googlegroups.com.

[Birthe C]

Peter,

I know. I just wonder if the beginner support of this group would be happily received as created issues on Github. All kinds I mean?

I am not sure than everyone creating adaptations and plugins even are on github but I may be wrong. If the interesting stuff leaves this group, people will leave the group but not necessarily to go on github.

Birthe

[Ste Wilson]

I don't get git hub...i keep trying... But.. Commits. Pr.. Fork.. Wtf... And it all seems very formal.. Not sure April McEnzie of London, Newfoundland would approve either! Which is to say I'm not sure threads like tiddly smile would be created on git hub.

[TiddlyTweeter]

Births wrote:

... I am not sure than everyone creating adaptations and plugins even are on github ... If the interesting stuff leaves this group, people will leave the group but not necessarily to go on github.

Ste Wilson wrote:

I don't get git hub...i keep trying... But.. Commits. Pr.. Fork.. Wtf... And it all seems very formal.. Not sure April McEnzie of London, Newfoundland would approve either! Which is to say I'm not sure threads like tiddly smile would be created on git hub.

Ciao Steve & Birthe 

Right!

At base is ONE place. IF we could get here to work for finding HISTORY we'd be fine.

I suspect the solution is (a) mainly technical; (b) slight change in posting behaviour (maybe enforced tagging?) Dunno.

The last thing I'd think good would be yet more fragmentation on "relevance detection".

GitHub is good. But its NOT a discussion forum. Totally WRONG for that. Its primarily a code management system.

Best wishes

TT

[Sarath Addanki]

Ciao TiddlyTweeter,

Github is more than code management. It's used for project management, defects board, discussions, Devops, Wiki.

Kindly look into this example to understand my view point,

For example, neovim is one of the most community contributed repository. (https://github.com/neovim/neovim/) If you look at how it's organized(plz see below some pics), and understand why it has a great success in it's own community then we may replicate similar success model.

Above pic: 1) - 524 contributors 2) 15k commits in ~ 2.5yr span(i think)

Above pic: 1) Documentation link 2) Quick help to new and existing users is provided via gitter.im chat functionality 3) Social communication

Above pic, One example of a issue where a discussion occurs. 70 comments on this. In that issue discussion, If anyone likes other view point, they can like the comments by adding smileys, refer other opened issues and so on.

Apart from this example, I have used other projects in github and whenever I need a help I open an issue there and I get help. And I will also know if a fix(needed) was implemented related to my issue or not.

thanks!

[Mark S.]

Github is not a user-friendly, welcoming place. Even the mechanics of posting are unfriendly, with tiny postage size boxes to type in. Almost any other solution suggested would be better for discussions.

TT's use case -- looking for "editing" in a forum where almost every post will relate to editing, is a bit of an outlier.

I think GG is the best *free* forum we're likely to find.

[Riz]

Hmm, there is a reddit forum for tiddlywiki

It has its advantages and disadvantages

Advantages.

1. You can vote on posts, even comments

2. You can sort by most voted, recent etc

3. You can tag a user in a comment and that user will be notified

4. Has an associated Wiki with the forum - of which editing privileges can be distributed.

5. Multiple dedicated mobile applications

Disadvantages

1. Email based workflow not possible

2. Allows only one tag per post. You can always tag it like [post] my post...

Rest is similar to GG.

Sincerely,

Riz

[Peter Buyze]

@Mark S.

My programming/scripting/coding skills can in no way be compared with yours, and I don't know 1 way or the other if Github is a good alternative to GG.

Nevertheless, I beg to differ with your comment about Github that it " is not a user-friendly, welcoming place."

With my primitive skills set I have been using Github for a few years now to post questions, comments, have discussions, and there is nothing user-unfriendly about it. In fact, it is simple and supports markdown (GFM as it's known, as you are undoubtedly aware).

As for the "tiny postage size boxes to type in", that is an exaggeration, to put it mildly. The size adjusts automatically to the length of the comment that is typed in it.

I don't know if GG should be replaced by another site. I have no problem with GG, apart from the fact that it's Google, but that is irrelevant to the consideration regarding replacement.

What IS relevant is that the discussion be based on a set of objective parameters. So far those parameters have not been defined; instead, people have tabled their personal views and preferences.

10 May 2020, 22:44 by tiddl...@googlegroups.com:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/8937fcf3-5475-484b-837c-3fca0ad0d673%40googlegroups.com.

[Ste Wilson]

We have been down and around this topic several times before and the outcome is usually that yes Google groups is a bit meh but this is where the community is, there have been attempts to get other platforms going we have a Reddit (which I think was Riz driving that) .. There may be a yammer.. but the interesting stuff seems to stay here.
Have a search (here we get to the main gg problem) on here for previous discussions.
What is needed for a move is an easy import mechanism for the stuff here, an option for posts to be emailerised, threads.. Voting.. Tags... Then we need mods.. And finally.. Possibly.. Someone, or a mechanism for the community, to stump up some cash if that solution is non free.

The points raised at the start of the discussion are that as well as the threads of discussion we need to be able to, actively as a community, add to a curated body of knowledge about tiddlywiki as solutions and code snippets are presented because what we lose here is continuity.

If only we could do it with tiddlywiki *cough cough* :D twederation.tiddlyspot.com

[PMario]

On Sunday, May 10, 2020 at 8:48:59 PM UTC+2, Sarath Addanki wrote:

Ciao TiddlyTweeter,

Github is more than code management. It's used for project management, defects board, discussions, Devops, Wiki.

We did use the main github repo for discussions about new TW options and ideas, several years ago, and it completely failed. ... In the main repo it isn't maintainable for developers.

In the main repo devs want to have "actionable" issues. .. aka bugs AND Pull Requests + Code reviews. ... that's basically it.

From my point of view, there are already too many open issues, that go back to 2013. ... Many of them are tagged "newfeature", "improvement" and "discussion" ... Those issues can't be closed, since most of them are still valid. ..

At github closed issue is a resolved or rejected issue. .. IMO there is no other option atm.

 - None of the open issues are rejected. ... They would have been closed with label "wontfix" ... They are valid, so wontfix doesn't really fit.

 - Many of the open issues are resolved but not closed, since only the "creator of the issue" and the "repo owner" can close them :/

From time to time me or someone else "floods" issue-creators and Jeremy with "Please close this issue" "bumps", with varying success. Many issue creators don't listen anymore and Jeremy has better things to do.

So for me the best thing we have to discuss new features, and develop new ideas is this group. ... It may not be the best solution, but it's "good enough" that it works.

My thoughts!

------------------

 - We do have a Gitter account: https://gitter.im/TiddlyWiki

 - We do have a Discord channel: https://discord.gg/7jHevu

IMO both channels are good for unrelated chat, but that's it. 

I personally look at them, may be once a week.

So from my point of view, the fastest way to get a response in a "topic related thread" is here.

 - There is Twitter: https://twitter.com/TiddlyWiki

 - There is reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/TiddlyWiki5/

I personally don't use and reply to them.

My behaviour!

have fun!

mario

[Martin Piron]

I agree that Reddit is a really nice alternative to GG for these reasons ! 

Moderators as well as viewers (through votes) have more power to organize the discussions. 

There is also the sidebar with global information available.

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ste Wilson wrote:

We have been down and around this topic several times before and the outcome is usually that yes Google groups is a bit meh but this is where the community is, 

(... My emphasis)

Absolutely right. Freshbies may not be aware that this issue comes around, sometimes at large scale. Various solutions tried and largely don't address the "problem".

I have come to think that the solution may be like a Vatican Papal Ruling in which some TW-pope pontificates with exactitude on past miscreant behaviour. I don't mean that negatively. I mean that it may occur after many iterations of pondering the real problem to tease out the MINIMAL change needed.

we have a Reddit (which I think was Riz driving that) ...

Still is. To decent effect. 

The points raised at the start of the discussion are that as well as the threads of discussion we need to be able to, actively as a community, add to a curated body of knowledge about tiddlywiki as solutions and code snippets are presented because what we lose here is continuity.

That is exactly it. As is, I think we are actively discarding collective LEVERAGE to RANDOM fragmentation. That does not make sense.

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

Mark S. wrote ...

TT's use case -- looking for "editing" in a forum where almost every post will relate to editing, is a bit of an outlier.

Right! Though let's qualify that as "perfectly reasonable" to want find "all-but-only" SUBSTANTIVE posts on "new work for making best of the TW editing mechanism."

The OP I stumbled into from the pragmatics of not being able to read here daily for the next few months. It made me super AWARE of how great work gets lost easily.

Overcoming the issue via an internal search that has poor heuristics leaves the issue as you spied it too. "Editing" is too generic a search term. YET it does encapsulate the thematic I am wanting to hone into.

My wonder is IF the text of these posts could be corralled in some way to give "all-but-only"? Looks like a long-shot?

The other other way might be going back to "freelance tagging". Though that was stopped some months ago because it went slightly feral-confusing.

Thoughts

Tt

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Sarath

Thanks for the detailed post. I do appreciate the time and care you took!

I am sure specific extensions on Github fitted to a specific community is neat, as in your example. But that needs BESPOKE spec and building.

Off-the-shelf Github it is not, IMO, and other (GH dev) posters here, don't find GH at all suited to open discussion & exploration because it's primarily about code development/management.

My thoughts

TT

[Peter Buyze]

@TT,

The reason why it keeps coming around is very simple: as I have pointed out, the parameters for what constitutes an acceptable site have NOT been set. Instead, everybody keeps giving his/her own opinion, which only confuses the issue with the result that nothing happens and we stay put at GG.

Now, staying put may be right, I cannot assess that, but if it is, it may well be so for the wrong reasons, and "Freshbies" awareness is irrelevant here. A number of "Maturies", as well as a number of "Freshbies", have indicated a a wish for a change. The issue will keep coming up, from both sides of the isle, so to speak, because of the absence of parameters.

12 May 2020, 11:45 by Tiddly...@assays.tv:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f9bb88de-b576-42a1-8dfb-00dd5fc5a843%40googlegroups.com.

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Peter

Peter Buyze wrote:

The issue will keep coming up, from both sides of the isle, so to speak, because of the absence of parameters.

Right. As in parameters, criterion etc.

Note my OP is a negative. By which I mean, it points to a very specific lack here in ACCESSING RECENT HISTORY EASILY. And no apparent reliable way to do it except read everything (not practical).

Mark S. pointed out that the OP specifics are difficult to address because the term "editing" is so widely used that matching posts about recent "innovations in editing tooling" would not work. 

I posted it because I thought it not only of interest to me but also a instance that exemplifies a common issue --- sifting what you need from everything you don't IF you are not able to read/scan everything daily.

Is that a suggestible parameter / aim? By which I mean "TRACKING past posts must improve"??

My final contention is this difficulty finding things in GG damages uptake of potential directions for TW -- basically leverage is weakened and we all lose out.

Best wishes

Josiah

[Peter Buyze]

Ciao TT, come stai?

I agree that when there is a lot of TW posting activity on the GG forum it can be difficult to keep up with, and information could get lost.

Jeremy's belief "the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces" seems reasonable. But then again, nobody is interested in every single issue that gets discussed. It is much more important to have a good search tool that can trawl through all the TW stuff on GG, and find it.

If that's not possible or impractical, then maybe Mat's Twederated database (if I understand him well?) could be the answer. I don't know.

I keep coming up against the questions "what do we want and what are we looking for to fulfil that need?" Those can only be answered when we set the parameters, the criteria, as you more aptly put it.

12 May 2020, 14:40 by Tiddly...@assays.tv:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/46cd2cf2-f8c1-4a07-aee5-d6764fe72ed4%40googlegroups.com.

[PMario]

Hi Foks,

This may be interesting: https://github.blog/2020-05-06-new-from-satellite-2020-github-codespaces-github-discussions-securing-code-in-private-repositories-and-more/#discussions

It turns out, that there is a new feature around the corner at github itself.

--------- I'm in brainstorming mode ;)

If we can convert an issue to a discussion and vice versa, IMO it will be a winner. ...

We could potentially clean up our issue-board without being rude, just closing a valid issue.

If feature discussions have moved to a level, that is actionable, we could create a new issue and link it, or move it, to a feature request issue, which is in the same house (repo).

There is a downside too. ... We will probably need a proper github team / repo management, since this won't be possible to manage by 1 person only.

... or is this a big new chance?

-------------

There is an interesting blog post, that also discusses some downsides of the new feature(s).

https://dzhavat.github.io/2020/04/04/my-thoughts-on-github-discussions.html

have fun!

mario

[TiddlyTweeter]

Peter Buyze wrote:

Ciao TT, come stai?

 

Sto bene. Ma il "lock-down" è molto noioso dopo qualche tempo.

 

Jeremy's belief "the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces" seems reasonable....

But then again, nobody is interested in every single issue that gets discussed.

 

It is much more important to have a good search tool that can trawl through all the TW stuff on GG, and find it.

I agree. A First stop may be seeing IF we can search better. More accurately. More heuristically. 

GLOOM did a lot of work teasing out the full potential of the GG native search arguments. They can't cope with the OP though, good as they are. I tried & failed.

The one thing I should look to is search in https://www.mail-archive.com/tiddl...@googlegroups.com/ Same group but a listserv version refereed back to here.

Other solutions REQUIRE people to DO things. Not bad idea, but someone(s) needs vote their Labour.

Best wishes

TT

[Mat]

PMario wrote:

This may be interesting: https://github.blog/2020-05-06-new-from-satellite-2020-github-codespaces-github-discussions-securing-code-in-private-repositories-and-more/#discussions

It turns out, that there is a new feature around the corner at github itself.

AHA! That is BIG news! Other than a "home made federated system" which is currently a pipe dream this is the only alternative to GG that I can imagine supporting a switch to - assuming they execute it well and it is user friendly also for people who don't normally understand Github (...I include myself in this category).

The closeness to the issue-reporting and PR's should (or at least could) be very valuable for the project. I really hope they make a good design. It might also spur further interest in GH as a free hosting alternative for wikis.

<:-)

[TonyM]

I would ask,

Now based on my key role in building a private social network from hundreds up to 45,000 staff in a large organisation, which somehow means little to others, I have not got traction myself.

The null hypothosis

How many people use the forum version of GG?, that is the ONLY way I use it, How many people use the archive? How many use the filters? Are we realing using GG well.

The problem is in my view finding out how to find a path for the community to evaluate and choose.

When I built a Yammer forum (still available), I would have being interested in people trying it, about three people spoke to me there, 20 joined but did not do a simple post, so I am confident it was not even given a chance, even although I insisted it solved most if not all needs (after reading everyone's comments). I believe I addressed a number of concerns in the GG threads relating to it but we had no team evaluating it. I tried most other solutions proposed but was not able to feedback my experience good or bad, with each to anyone except the person(s) who proposed it, so my experience did not influence anyone ie it ended up being one persons experience and no collaboration took place.

The key features in my mind about yammer I would like to see for this community, is the ability to review all activity, but focus on special interest groups, or as a newbee start in a simple group for them. referring to prior discussions and avoiding too much repeating oneself was also good, as well as allowing voluntary group owners to curate there own groups.

This is about moving the culture, and cultures cant move easily until their is one to go to, we need a team of people to commit to a new solution. 

• Never propose a replacement, first provide a good alternative and maintain the place existing systems ie GG effectively, 
• time will determine if the new solution is a success. 
• I already lost the argument in GG that self admin was the best approach democratising the admin functions, limited admins is unsustainable.

There is no way for our community to let a set of individuals take responsibility for a project and have their knowledge and experience applied to a community end. Even if in the end this is a population driven way to determine what is successful. Jeremy remains the only true leader, yet to expect him to personally promote, drive or authorise cultural changes is too much for an individual. 

Please do not just reply and only criticise yammer, this reply is not an invitation for its criticism, my points would be valid for any choice. Feel free to critisise my other words.

Regards

Tony

[Ste Wilson]

Hi Tony,
I think as has been said before.. Their just aren't that many of us so getting a weight of numbers to start a shift to something else is difficult. (I mean just have a look at the amount that happens ON gg when you and TT are absent) (Did I join you on yammer?! If not I apologise).

I've completely forgotton what, if any, point I was going to make after that.

See you tomorrow.

[TiddlyTweeter]

TonyM wrote:

Now based on my key role in building a private social network from hundreds up to 45,000 staff in a large organisation, which somehow means little to others, I have not got traction myself.

Tony, as Ste W. commented a primary issue is there are not so many of "us" here.

Re the 45 K, I'd love to know more. But as a number itself its a hint more than a depiction of significance? 

The null hypothosis

How many people use the forum version of GG?, that is the ONLY way I use it, How many people use the archive? How many use the filters? Are we realing using GG well.

I don't have stats. I can see though that a lot use email version. Some aspects of Web version they will miss. Especially REVISED posts.

 

The problem is in my view finding out how to find a path for the community to evaluate and choose.

The plain text archive version I'm seriously looking at to see if you you can interrogate it better than Web version. 

When I built a Yammer forum (still available) ... it was not even given a chance, even although I insisted it solved most if not all needs (after reading everyone's comments). I believe I addressed a number of concerns in the GG threads relating to it but we had no team evaluating it.

Right. An issue can exist and be debated yet translation to action is another matter. 

I been very vocal on downsides here in GG. My main thought has devolved to "GG makes tracking history hard. Very hard." That stands out as the singular issue here.

BUT GG for direct discussion is excellent. Threading is relevant. 

BUT history is quickly lost.

There is a fundamental tension between "now" & "then". Now is fine, then is quickly gone.

 

... The key features in my mind about yammer I would like to see for this community, is the ability to review all activity, but focus on special interest groups ...

Its a good aim.  The issue with that, I think, is (1) not enough people & (2), likely most important, it looks like it would fragment things.

I also think worth noting the great recent collaboration developing the e-book version. That was NOT an open process. 3 developers linked up and just did it no one knew about till completed. Worked well.

Overall I'd guess that what is needed is really a better ONE group here but with decent past history tracking??

I do appreciate your thinking a lot on the issue, so thanks.

---

Now, regarding the OP, I'm still not sure its actually solvable under any circumstances. 

It was a limited pragmatic issue of how to isolate "innovations in TW edit mechanisms" for a few recent weeks.

So far that specific remains both elusive and, I think, a pertinent use case of lack of access to what you need. Is it solvable? Not sure.

Best wishes

TT

[Mark S.]

Idea. We need curation, but the curation needs to be easy.

Every week we have a thread pinned to the top, Synopsis week 2020-05-08 -- 2020-05-15.

The thread is tagged "synopsis".

As topics develop, people can add short descriptions and forum links to the synopsis thread. e.g.

  

   Mark S. presents idea for synopsis thread. http://google-is-a-mess....

   keywords: synopsis, discussions, google

   Dave Gifford releases Stroll, a roam-like tiddlywiki http://google-it-uself

   key words: editing, editor, roam, dual panel

   John Doe presents sample code for converting TiddlyWiki dates to human readable dates

   keywords: dates, dating, code, gregorian, calendar

  

We would ask people not to start conversations within this thread. We don't have to exercise control over keywords the way we would with tags. People can add whatever keywords they think are relevant.

At the end of the week, the thread is unpinned and a new thread is created. Old threads can be found by searching for tag  "synopsis"

Because curation is quick (you're already in the forum) and descriptions are meta, you can find topics about "editing" that are actually about editing.

An alternative form of the same idea would post the synopsis thread in another venue (e.g. reddit, yammer)

On Sunday, May 3, 2020 at 2:46:01 AM UTC-7, TiddlyTweeter wrote:

TW is in its Golden Age.

The sheer volume of solutions is amazing!

But will you find them tomorrow? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLA7sanwnN8

---

I'm busy and not able to read here daily. Its interestingly proved a nightmare reading this group after a few days. So much richness at a whim of Google.

---

I think we are throwing away through Google Groups DECENT CONTINUITY. 

What we have is genius innovators. Some neglected. Some triumphant. Few able to collectivize for common good.

NO mechanism here for that. 

Leverage is worked against by system.

TT

thoughts, again.

[Ste Wilson]

Might be worth a try....

[Julio Peña]

Hello there,

@Mark S: I actually like your idea quite a bit.

I'm with Ste...I definitely wouldn't hurt.

I'm one of those who tends to pull hairs 

when trying to find info in the forum.

Best wishes,

Julio

[Mat]

Mark S. wrote:

Idea. We need curation, but the curation needs to be easy.

I agree - but I don't agree that your proposal fulfills the "easy", at least not easy enough, for it to be workable in the longer run. (I'd happily be proven wrong,  though!) 

IMO people are willing to provide extremely simple meta data via a click (e.g a thumbs up or selecting predefined tags) or possibly to type a word or two, but that's already pushing it. And, perhaps even more critically, it has to be done "here", not "over there". I don't even think a solution where you're supposed to merely scroll elsewhere would work. That is, if we expect "an average forum user" to contribute. Think youtube likes or almost all social systems. Relying on a few individuals is not only unsustainable but it also makes the curation less meaningful because it becomes more biased.

But again, I'm happily proven wrong.

BTW, I bet you've all forgotten WHitWoT by Daniel Baird:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/tiddlywiki/WHitWoT%7Csort:date

<:-)

[TonyM]

Mark,

I don't disagree this may be a way to get GG to behave better but if we had the metadata other solutions use it would be easy for interest groups to curate their own group while maintaining visibility to the masses. That is their own, links, pins, references, documents, contacts etc... Groups can quote relavant other groups and get backlinks.

Regards

Tony

[TonyM]

TT

Tony, as Ste W. commented a primary issue is there are not so many of "us" here.

 

I am aware of that, and that why we can curate things with the correct solution.

Re the 45 K, I'd love to know more. But as a number itself its a hint more than a depiction of significance? 

The point is I was key in the design, promotion and building of Yammer from 1,200 people to an extent everyone wanted to and used it across a large organisation, with all its special interest groups etc... We had self moderation, an a key value in the "All Company" thread where you could mention any post to for a broad audience, or in a group here people have nominated and interest, or you can just review a group that has had activity. Replies are directed to an Inbox, not emails. Let us put it another way it seemed to me it was an indel platform with a couple of exceptions based on my extencive knowledge.

I only wanted a few to consider it. SO I wonder how we can expect anything different

 

BUT GG for direct discussion is excellent. Threading is relevant. 

Not really, I can't just like something , or follow an edition, a plugin or an author

BUT history is quickly lost.

With email threads yes.

 

There is a fundamental tension between "now" & "then". Now is fine, then is quickly gone.

 

... The key features in my mind about yammer I would like to see for this community, is the ability to review all activity, but focus on special interest groups ...

Its a good aim.  The issue with that, I think, is (1) not enough people & (2), likely most important, it looks like it would fragment things.

I do not think the number of people importiant, for some years I and my partner had a private yammer group, at least not on Yammer, but some platforms should scale well.

 

I also think worth noting the great recent collaboration developing the e-book version. That was NOT an open process. 3 developers linked up and just did it no one knew about till completed. Worked well.

Overall I'd guess that what is needed is really a better ONE group here but with decent past history tracking??

This would happen much more in curated groups/projects. and would continue indefinitely with new people taking up ongoing maintenance in the future 

 

Now, regarding the OP, I'm still not sure its actually solvable under any circumstances. 

It was a limited pragmatic issue of how to isolate "innovations in TW edit mechanisms" for a few recent weeks.

This is why I proposed a collaborative blog, see To blog or not blog.

 

So far that specific remains both elusive and, I think, a pertinent use case of lack of access to what you need. Is it solvable? Not sure.

I am confident but we don't have "analysis paralysis" nor  "death by a thousand committees", we just need a small cohort to demonstrate and populate curated content on a system which remains interactive and cross posted with GG so no data is orphaned, this is as easy as providing links to topics and posts, and GG pointing to a larger discussion on the solutions we trial. 

Another problem we have is it is really hard to determine the degree of expertise our members have, and trust each other that the effort will be a time saver and productivity enhancement after the initial investment. Ie we find it hard to mount a small cohort prepared to give something a go.

Regards

Tony

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao TonyM

A few footnotes. Nothing too serious. (Everything else I read and understood, I think)

 Re the 45 K, I'd love to know more. But as a number itself its a hint more than a depiction of significance? 

TonyM wrote:

The point is I was key in the design, promotion and building of Yammer from 1,200 people to an extent everyone wanted to and used it across a large organisation, with all its special interest groups etc...

Ah! Thanks for making that clearer. It's significant!

 

BUT GG for direct discussion is excellent. Threading is relevant. 

Not really, I can't just like something , or follow an edition, a plugin or an author

 Oh! I thought threading here was Good. Technically GG built off Listserv & Usenet that, basically, established what "threading is". It seems good to me.

BUT history is quickly lost.

With email threads yes.

Interesting. Pragmatically it seems lost with BOTH Email & Web versions IF the user is limited to a crude search interface. Web version sucks after a few weeks as much as dumb passive email.

Note, an ADVANTAGE  of Email version is it sits on local computer in plain text format so maybe its actually MORE open to (additional) easier heuristic searching?

There is a fundamental tension between "now" & "then". Now is fine, then is quickly gone.

 

... The key features in my mind about yammer I would like to see for this community, is the ability to review all activity, but focus on special interest groups ...

Its a good aim.  The issue with that, I think, is (1) not enough people & (2), likely most important, it looks like it would fragment things.

I do not think the number of people importiant, for some years I and my partner had a private yammer group, at least not on Yammer, but some platforms should scale well.

The issue is "private"?  What I mean is: initiatives by common interests together. Sounds good if that is what you meant? But it's not an "in public?".

 

I also think worth noting the great recent collaboration developing the e-book version. That was NOT an open process. 3 developers linked up and just did it no one knew about till completed. Worked well.

This would happen much more in curated groups/projects. and would continue indefinitely with new people taking up ongoing maintenance in the future 

 Right. But I doubt the start of that is a public appeal. More likely where folk with common interest simply, between them, do-it, THEN go public? 

So far that specific remains both elusive and, I think, a pertinent use case of lack of access to what you need. Is it solvable? Not sure.

... we just need a small cohort to demonstrate and populate curated content on a system which remains interactive and cross posted with GG so no data is orphaned,

VERY interesting comment!

My issue here is that it looks like what people DO ALREADY!

In a way it devolves back to the OP. I was most interested in finding things I KNOW are there and well presented, but buried, not findable --- the system creates the orphans, the orphaned don't like the system, from poor search, poor tagging etc. 

OR maybe the OP is a hopeless case where the info requirement ("changes in edit functions recently") just can't hit the tarmac well. 

In which case, is it a specific GG issue or the Universe of Linguistic Limitation?

Best wishes

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Mark

Quick comment on one point you made I want to underline

Mark S. wrote:

   

   Mark S. presents idea for synopsis thread. http://google-is-a-mess....

   keywords: synopsis, discussions, google (My underline emphasis)

Seems to me that you advocating shift of organisation from formal taggery to IN-text HIT WORDS.

I think its a v. neat insight. "Formal" procedures on GG are very crude.

"Freelance finding", IF the words are there, could be much better.

I hope to comment more ASAP in a bit more detail.

FWIW, yours' is the only reply that addressed the OP directly.

TT

[TonyM]

TT

It was not my intention to argue in favor of a particular solution but as I understand it none of your concerns are so in hammer. Email subscription and replies open special interest groups updates brought forward, subscribe to all, daily or weekly digest, or use only online. I think it would be a good solution based on almost everyone's concerns.

We can build a culture based on automatic or self curation even collaborative documents.

My key point is I have a solution but it was Actualy evaluated by only a few. I could revisit and do a video but only if I was confident people would consider it. By the way there is a way to partially integrated with gg through links we already use.

Its not perfect but its close

Regards
Tony

[TonyM]

Post script

Threading is good. Threading on steroids better.

Tony

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Mat

I think you slightly over-trash Mark S. The point HE WAS MAKING is in context of what we GOT. Not an immaginarium of possible thingies that are non-existent.

YES. It would need an author of a tool to add a string of keywords. Or a curator. In a post. If they realise its (utility to) Informatic-Darwinian to do so.

The key POINT I read in Mark S.' post  was the value of descriptive text that gives "in-line proximate tagging". I think it looks hopeful WITHIN HERE, GG, the otherwise one-legged discussion group.

FWIW, some little time ago ability to POST-TAG freelance at will was stopped for this GG. I understand why. I noticed it was messed up. But it all went silent. That is useless. Taggery is actively evolving always.

It is OBVIOUS  that once a thread is no longer active here there are serious issues finding it. Indisputable. Crap search mechanism. Taggery that can't really handle the polymorphous TW.

For instance, Mat, it is currently impossible to find YOUR  excellent plugins via GG easily on one search. That is nuts. WHY can't I find ALL YOUR GOOD STUFF in one go? Dimmi. Really.

My point to you, Mat, is, actually, within CONTEXT of GG, Mark's approach (maybe taken a slightly different way, not sure) is GOOD to think with.

In terms of the OP richer descriptive text WITHIN posts might provide sufficient to hit targets. 

His approach does approach the OP, which I am grateful for.

Thoughts

TT

[Mat]

TiddlyTweeter wrote:

Ciao Mat

I think you slightly over-trash Mark S.

I certainly hope it was not insulting. The ONLY thing I said about, specifically, Marks idea was:

I agree - but I don't agree that your proposal fulfills the "easy", at least not easy enough, for it to be workable in the longer run.

In deed, the rest was an imaginarium of the non-existent but it is my assessment of reality - i.e what would be required if we expect a solution where the community curates things AND that it sustains, i.e that people continue to do it not just for a month but onwards.

BTW, here is a more realistic idea, simply because it is less demanding Maybe someone has suggested it already, I have no idea:

Anyone adds tags to the threads in their posts, in the form of distinguishable keywords. E.g this thread hereby gets the tag #foobar. Done.

Unfortunately, that most obvious prefix (#) is not significant in search, i.e if you search for #foobar you'll get search results for merely foobar. Not even searching for "#foobar" (i.e within quotes) helps. So it'd have to be another distinguisher, but you get the point. Anyone more ambitious could then add such tags to anyone elses thread, by making a new post with only those tags. Anybody know some character or super-easily-typed string that the search mechanism can distinguish?

Such a solution would at least be semi-realistic in the longer run. Only some individuals would do it but not as few as something that is more demanding. A big downside is that if I found some ol' goodie and just want to tag it to increase it's findability, this will also push that old thread to forum top, out of the blue and without necessarily having any real new info.

So far, my hopes are for the coming Github discussion feature. We might even have a chance to affect its functionality by requesting stuff, since it is brand new so they probably listen more than what GG admin does.

P.S Since you bring up my own plugins - I try to prefix the subject line with "Presenting:" for this very reason. It is not fully consistent and, especially, I didn't do it before I started doing it ;-)  Plus I occasionally announce something that is not official by merely linking to it inside a post because I thought it still contributed to the context of the discussion, so such posts of mine would of course not be easily findable.

<:-)

[PMario]

On Saturday, May 16, 2020 at 10:53:37 AM UTC+2, Mat wrote:

..

P.S Since you bring up my own plugins - I try to prefix the subject line with "Presenting:" for this very reason.

I do use [INTRO] [ANNOUNCEMENT] [VIDEO] and [AddOn] in the thread title, if I want to promote something and also find them later on.

I think VIDEO and ADDON is clear.

INTRO and ANNOUNCEMENT could be considered the same. But I do use INTRO for new plugins or a new major version. eg: from 0.x to 1.0 ...

and announcement is used to push info, if something special happens.

It is not fully consistent and, especially, I didn't do it before I started doing it ;-) 

I love this one!

 

-mario

[Mark S.]

On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 12:44:58 PM UTC-7, Mat wrote:

I agree - but I don't agree that your proposal fulfills the "easy", at least not easy enough, for it to be workable in the longer run. (I'd happily be proven wrong,  though!) 

It's easier than going to a separate web site. Having to open a separate tab, possibly signing in with a new login, searching on a different platform -- that appears to be a BIG speed bump for a lot of people. There was a study a few years ago that said that people would rather clean their toilets than create yet another new login.

But it's important that the process not be TOO easy. We saw what happened when it became easy for people to mark threads "completed" or to add ad-hoc "tags". A small speed bump will mean that people will be somewhat committed to the contents of a particular post or thread before creating the entry.

[Mat]

Mark S. wrote:

But it's important that the process not be TOO easy. We saw what happened when it became easy for people to mark threads "completed" or to add ad-hoc "tags". A small speed bump will mean that people will be somewhat committed to the contents of a particular post or thread before creating the entry.

IMO the problem with "completed" was that it was not obvious that clicking it would make it visible to everyone. Just like you can click star and it's only for me. Or if I archive an email thread, then I conveniently don't have to see it anymore. The consequences from clicking "completed" were not obvious.

<:-)

[Mark Kerrigan]

Hello

I feel like this same discussion keeps happening almost like groundhog day over and over. Generally I feel like GG tends to work for most people. My workflow is I subscribe to the daily abridged summary and then I click and follow the thread titles which interest me. I've also been using the starred feature more lately too.

What I've noticed lately is it's really hard to keep up with all of the threads in this group because of the growing popularity. Search and discoverability don't always happen because this would depend on people creating good thread titles that accurately describe the content. Second even if you are able to dig back and find someone's previous solution, there is almost no reason not to post the the same or similar question again because you don't know who might read it and offer a different solution. 

Just my two cents

- Mark

I would also say becase