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?
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.
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.
<:-)--
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.
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.
Hi TiddlyTweeterI'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
I believe the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index the useful information that surfaces.
I would struggle to envisage any software features that could significantly improve the situation.
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 may be old school but I kind of like Google Groups.
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.
... 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.
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.
--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.
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
Ciao TiddlyTweeter,Github is more than code management. It's used for project management, defects board, discussions, Devops, Wiki.
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)
we have a Reddit (which I think was Riz driving that) ...
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.
TT's use case -- looking for "editing" in a forum where almost every post will relate to editing, is a bit of an outlier.
--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.
The issue will keep coming up, from both sides of the isle, so to speak, because of the absence of parameters.
--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.
Ciao TT, come stai?
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.
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/#discussionsIt turns out, that there is a new feature around the corner at github itself.
I've completely forgotton what, if any, point I was going to make after that.
See you tomorrow.
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 hypothosisHow 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) ... 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.
... 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 ...
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.TTthoughts, again.
Idea. We need curation, but the curation needs to be easy.
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?
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??
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.
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...
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.
This would happen much more in curated groups/projects. and would continue indefinitely with new people taking up ongoing maintenance in the future
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,
Mark S. presents idea for synopsis thread. http://google-is-a-mess....
keywords: synopsis, discussions, google (My underline emphasis)
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
Threading is good. Threading on steroids better.
Tony
Ciao MatI think you slightly over-trash Mark S.
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.
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 ;-)
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!)
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.