What is TiddlyWiki's demographic, both current and intended?

[OGNSYA]

I'm curious to know what type of people uses TiddlyWiki currently, and what type of people the project wants to reach?

I believe that discussing this might help inform many of the conversations that have been going on, such as the Getting Started page, and the UI/workflow redesign. 

In case this is not known, here are a few possible guide questions to help estimate:

(I included an initial answer in all of them, just as a starting point):

• What type of people uses TW? (considering only those who create/develop)
  (49% coders, 49% casual coders, 2% non-coders?)
• How do they use TW? (considering only those who create/develop)
  (50% very basic usage, 30% uses several features/plugins, 15% hack/develop plugins, 5% experts?)
• What proportion of internet users use TW on a frequent basis? (2% edit/view, 3% as viewers only?)
• How many internet users are coders? (in general, regardless of TW)
• Non-coders (98.5%?)
• Casual coders (0.5%?)
• Coders (1%?)

This is intentionally very simplified, especially because most of these questions can't be answered objectively. Regardless, knowing the community's perception of them is already very useful. This is meant to be a first draft. Please feel free to correct/suggest changes. (For the guesses, I partly used some data found online. )

Edit (2020/06/18): to account for view-only users

[Birthe C]

How would we know? Maybe the people here guess some numbers, but in reality TiddlyWiki is used by many that we know nothing about.

Birthe

[Alex Hough]

Tony said something on the thread that Thomas started to share his TW on the subject of problem solving: "its molding clay for the mind"[1]. I think these type of user are the ones Birthe identifies as the "many that we know nothing about."

Looking back into the history of of TiddlyWiki there have been some serious and high profile computer scientists such as Joe Armstrong. In his talkwith Jeremy "Intertwingling the Tiddlywiki with Erlang" [3] he starts by talking about Ted Nelson a pioneer of hypertext which Jeremy picks up on later in the talk.

Steve Schneider has used TW to teach hyper-textual and interactive writing. DesignWriteStudio [4] is a freely available resource built using a TiddlyWiki to help explore hyper-text and interactive texts. An early example of his work using TiddlyWiki is "Companion to Web Campaigning Kirsten A. Foot & Steven M. Schneider MIT Press, 2006"  [5]. There is a paper on TiddlyWiki being used as an interactive note pad to help teach science. [6]

Joe Armstrong talks about "all in oneness" and from reading his GitHub hosted TW he likes the fact that TW is a Quine ("a curiosity of computer science", says Jeremy in the talk), putting it at the top of  list [7].

I imagine that "those who we know nothing about" may include those who have come to TW with previous interests in the fundamentals of hypertext writing, computer science and research in general like Joe and Steve.

There's a long list of professional / expert developers with a passion for open source development. Eric Schulman is without doubt the longest standing example here.  The developers coming and going over the years tend not to be those following the to the latest fads and trends, perhaps because TW is not a technology which lends itself to commercialisation in the same way as being a master of a particularly in demand framework. I think many developers don't get TW, but those who do seem to be those with a deep understanding and application of the elegance of design. 

There is at least three doctors: Saq, Rizwan, Abraham. A missionary (Dave Gifford) and a  Mohhmaed chemical engineer. These people have become highly proficient TW developers. Saq talks about learning to code using TiddlyWiki in the recent Hangout [8]. There are some more hangouts planned -- currently on hold (get well soon Jeremy!) -- but they are something TiddlyWiki fan like myself are quite excited about. 

I think the best way of finding out about the users of TW is probably to start using TW and explore the eco-system. Because TW is an off line technology without data collection by design, I think traditional methods of analysis might not work so well. The community is small enough to get to know regular contributors and the issues they try to solve. 

 

Alex

[1] http://thomasteepe-archiv.de/

[2] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/tiddlywiki/tTUKcHOObE0/VsWxm65eBgAJ

[3] https://www.softwaretalks.io/v/6705/joe-armstrong-and-jeremy-ruston-intertwingling-the-tiddlywiki-with-erlang-code-mesh-ldn-18

[4] http://designwritestudio.com/

[5] https://web.archive.org/web/20061103082226/http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/0262062585/WebCampaigningDigitalSupplement.html#%5B%5BWelcome%20to%20the%20Web%20Campaigning%20Digital%20Supplement%5D%5D

[6] http://people.sunyit.edu/~krieseg/IDT590/Scrapbook/data/20111205115236/4-ithet-2006.pdf

[7]  https://joearms.github.io/#Index

[8] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvnqgfvohfM

[TW Tones]

OGNSYA,

I think these questions are important, so thanks for asking the community.

With all due respect there is an issue with your question. 

If I asked you how many people use WordPress?, you may be tempted to ignore end users, but I think its fair to say 99% of people have used WordPress without even knowing it.

Even more so because designers sometimes use it as the back-end and write their own front end.

I consider tiddlywiki a platform amongst its many uses, so it enters this world. 

Tiddlywiki is still more of a self serve, environment but it is hard to quantify, including recent use to generate static sites.

Perhaps the question needs to ask how many users iis n the audience for a published tiddlywiki? I could be a user in one and a coder in another.

Regards

Tony

On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 2:44:03 AM UTC+10, OGNSYA wrote:

I'm curious to know what type of people uses TiddlyWiki currently, and what type of people the project wants to reach?

I believe that discussing this might help inform many of the conversations that have been going on, such as the Getting Started page, and the UI/workflow redesign. 

In case this is not known, here are a few possible guide questions to help estimate:

(I included an initial answer in all of them, just as a starting point):

• What type of people uses TW?
  

• (49% coders, 49% casual coders, 2% non-coders?)

• How do they use TW? (compared to TW's full potential)

• 
  (50% very basic usage, 30% uses several features/plugins, 15% hack/develop plugins, 5% experts?)

• What proportion of internet users use TW on a frequent basis? (2-5%?)

• How many internet users are coders? (in general, regardless of TW)
• Non-coders (98.5%?)
• Casual coders (0.5%?)
• Coders (1%?)

[TiddlyTweeter]

On big numbers.  A very useful thing to know. Your questions are Good.

Some time ago I tried pin it down. The issue is that TW release has NO tracking on by default. There is no way to collect reliable data directly of any kind.

Proxy measures (user groups, common hosting services) are possible but will only tell you there are more Japanese users than you might realise, that users from German speaking countries are High and that English Speaking users are more up north than in  the Antipodes.

The more detailed (good) questions you ask are I think  for an interesting research project. :-)

Best wishes

TT

On Wednesday, 17 June 2020 18:44:03 UTC+2, OGNSYA wrote:

I'm curious to know what type of people uses TiddlyWiki currently, and what type of people the project wants to reach?

I believe that discussing this might help inform many of the conversations that have been going on, such as the Getting Started page, and the UI/workflow redesign. 

In case this is not known, here are a few possible guide questions to help estimate:

(I included an initial answer in all of them, just as a starting point):

• What type of people uses TW?
  

• (49% coders, 49% casual coders, 2% non-coders?)

• How do they use TW? (compared to TW's full potential)
  

• (50% very basic usage, 30% uses several features/plugins, 15% hack/develop plugins, 5% experts?)

• What proportion of internet users use TW on a frequent basis? (2-5%?)

• How many internet users are coders? (in general, regardless of TW)
• Non-coders (98.5%?)
• Casual coders (0.5%?)
• Coders (1%?)

[TiddlyTweeter]

Alex

I hope you are collecting your "speeches" somewhere! :-) ... by the neatness & footnotes I'm assuming you wrote this in a wiki? Yes?

Best wishes

Josiah

[TW Tones]

TT, OGNSYA

Re tracking, I have felt for sometime, if the core included an opt in to tickle a URL somewhere so that we could get an indication of implementations on the internet and their visitation possibly quite a few in the community would opt in. If this allowed opt in to a league table of popular wikis people may be happy to have their wiki rise and become more visible.

Then we could start to answer the above questions.

Regards

TW Tone's aka TonyM 

[TiddlyTweeter]

Tones

As far as I understand it there is total antipathy to any kind of collective tracking for TW built in. I think that is good.

One simple thing might be a meta tag announcing "This is a TW"  in the header a trawler might  recognise. I see no harm in that. So long as you can delete it.

I am totally opposed to anything that "polls" or "sniffs" around.

TT

[TW Tones]

TT,

The point is a wiki should allow Opt-in to provide information to the community.

I would not only be happy, but would like such a services to go on my Gihub page, the playground and blog wikis I have published.

I expect more people to publish content for public or community view would like this as well, 

Its a feature rather than a threat. 

Provide informed consent options for both designer and visitor there remains no contention in my view.

Perhaps add the ability for them to vote it up in socials etc... 

Regards

Tony

[TW Tones]

TT,

What does Opt In mean to you? Surely that is enough to calm you down?

Any resource on the internet, a website, a link and mail out already may use a way to see how many visitors they have. 

Sure there are multi-site traps fed by advertising add on's the world over, but I am not talking about this. 

In fact we can already use standard analytics to see the ip address, unique visitors etc... on any tiddlywiki we host on the internet, and it can be done without your knowledge, but you should assume its being done.

On top of this I am suggesting a community method to opt into a simple "I have being loaded" analytic. We are designers, we can force Opt in, we can permit user opt out we can do anything. So if we want we should fill a gap, provide a service that meets with our community values. By providing this service we reduce the likely hood of others being developed in a vacuum, without community standards applied.

We can also advertise how to conceal your details via secure proxies etc... if you want anonymity.

Regards

Tony

On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 12:06:34 PM UTC+10, TiddlyTweeter wrote:

Ciao Tones

I don't wanna get hysterical or entirely lose the OP here.

I agree with you that like minded who want to connect should do it in easiest way. 

Just don't put anything in MY architecture that let's you sniff me.

You see my point?

In calls for easier co-working there is an implicit assumption. 

In fact most of the net is seriously infected with it.

That the "reception" plug socket is open. 

I don't want any such socket.

Your idea of a "vote up" mechanism is an example of the "slippery slope" I think.

Looks innocent. Bad idea to let anything like that near core. Plugin, of course is okay.

But the distinction between voluntarism and hard code is not as sharp as you might think.

And even thoughts in this direction (information to "the" community) worry me as they are seductively, dangerously loose.

Now I sound like a paranoid twat :-) But there is substance in my thoughts on this.

Back to the OP. The poster was interested in "types" of people who use TW and "types" we trying to reach.

Its kinda odd actually. To the First, you & me :-), to the Second no idea/anyone/don't care.

But right in this spot you may feel differently?

Best wishes

TT

[TW Tones]

By the way this is one of the only ways to try and answer a few of the OT questions.

[Birthe C]

TT,

I Agree totally.

TW Tones,

Oh yes the informed consent. Always are we hearing about that one. Many thinks hearing this, and without consent nothing works. Are you sure open source and tiddlywiki users are really into sniffing, "informed" or not?

Dividing people. Are Tiddlywiki to be elitist? Or do we continue thinking that beginner friendly means hiding functionality or removing it, to make everything simpler. Trying to be similar to the popular software of the day? Both would be totally wrong.

Many users love tiddlywiki and in fact many new users presenting themselves in this group start by telling, i have been using TW5 for a "time" now and are loving it.

Maybe that is what TW users have in common.

Birthe

[PMario]

On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 5:07:16 AM UTC+2, TW Tones wrote:

... We are designers, we can force Opt in, we can permit user opt out we can do anything.

I think has to be opt-in. Opt-out should be no option! See the GDPR rules. ... There is a big problem, that most sites still force users to enable the full set of tracking mechanisms.

Opt-out forces many internet users to use add-blockers like ublock-origin or AddBlock-plus or Ghostery ... 

Just my thoughts

-mario

[PMario]

Hi

As you saw already, there is very little info about TWs demographic user base.

I did publish some stats about my browser AddOn, which is provided by Mozilla for add-on developers. The stats are delayed by 3 days and only give some very basic info.

See my post: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tiddlywiki/VlQRAP8z5Bw

It was from end of August 2019, where the addOn had about 800 "average daily users". The numbers go up after the holiday season to about 1000 daily users.

There is 1 image, which shows Windows (~60%), Linux (%30) , MacOS (10%) and Android (10-20) users.

This gives a little bit of demographic info.

There is a little bit about browser language settings (3 days ago!), which may be of interest. (Sorry ... I'm mixing languages with countries)

English US: 598

German (de): 192

English UK: 101

French (fr): 69

German (de-de): 63

Japan (ja): 38

China (zh-cn): 22

Russian (ru): 18

Canadian (en-ca): 16

Italian (it): 16

Nederlands (nl): 10

Espania (es-es): 9

Portugese - Brasil (pt-br): 9

Australia (en-au): 8

Taiwan (zh-tw): 8

Hungary (hu): 3

Poland (pl): 3

Serbia & Montenegro (cs): 3

German Austria (de-at): 3

Argentinia (es-ar): 3

Sweden (sv-se): 2

Mexico (es-mx): 2

Norway (nb-no): 2

New Zealand (en-nz): 2

Chile (es-cl): 2

Switzerland (de-ch): 2

Sierra Leone (sl): 2

Turkey (tr): 1

Catalan (ca): 1

(ja-jp-mac): 1

Finland (fi): 1

Denmark (da): 1

Slovakia (sk): 1

South Africa (en-za): 1

(el): 1

What I did see, was a jump from "just below 1000" up to about 1100 daily users after the "product hunt" campaign. So activities like this one to have a very positive impact to our community. The "user base" may have been increased by up to 10% and is pretty stable since then. ...

Since file-backups is only 1 TW file saver and only available for FF the total numbers are probably only a small part of the community. 

That's it

have fun!

mario

[TW Tones]

Folks

My point about optin/out is if I choose a wiki of mine to opt in to basic visitor counts and that wiki is public perhaps I should allow visitors to opt out if posible.

I am totally in favor of opt in, as a rule.

I need to understand this more.

Tony

[OGNSYA]

Thank you for all the replies - very informative and helpful stuff!

I appreciate the amazing individual examples/cases Alex shared. I also agree with Tones that the project could greatly benefit from having an opt-in centralized directory of public TW's.

What I'm suggesting in this thread is a bit different from that though. I'm suggesting to look at the big picture instead - numbers and statistics.

Indeed, TW doesn't lend itself well for analytics. A poll could be helpful. About analytics, I agree with TT that this should be kept separate from the software itself, to make it very clear for all users that TW has no "online component" (unless this is explicitly set up).

This is not the focus of this thread though. I think that, for the purpose of getting a general idea of TW usage, an informal discussion/poll within the existing TW community could suffice (stats like the ones shared by PMario should definitely be considered as well).

As I mentioned, the point of doing this would be mainly to better (though not accurately) inform next steps in bringing TW to a wider audience, such as the discussions going on about the website, and the UI. (By the way, I agree with Birthe that this should never mean removing functionality).

For example, if we find that most TW users are tech-savvy, and see no need to expand to a more general audience, then the Getting Started page is fine as it is (and this thread can be abandoned). On the other hand, if there is desire to attract a broader audience, then that should be dealt with, as well as improvements in the UI, and a more modern editing experience (and this thread can be helpful for understanding who to target, and how).

I updated my original post based on Tone's suggestion, to consider view-only users (and reworded parts of it to make it clear it refers only to users who create/develop). All numbers there are just my initial estimates, so please suggest changes. If enough people contribute and/or think these stats can be useful, I'd by happy to turn them into some nice graphs to help visualize them better.

[TiddlyTweeter]

OGNSYA wrote:

... the project could greatly benefit from having an opt-in centralized directory of public TW's.

Opt-in aggregation (not network, just public announcement of resource) exists for TW already! Its not used a lot. I don't think its widely known. Though the purpose is limited its more than a decent proof of concept. It maintains "Community Search". It is a centralised robot. https://tiddlywiki.com/#TWCommunitySearch

"TWederation" is another approach, that is more like Tones wants, spearheaded by Jed Carty (& Mat) that is de-centralised. Much promise, low uptake. http://twederation.tiddlyspot.com/#

What exactly are we wanting to DO together more than here is my question that extant networks don't do already?

Just some notes & thoughts.

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

OGNSYA wrote:

... I'm suggesting to look at the big picture instead - numbers and statistics.

 Right. PMario's example with one plugin he maintains is broadly indicative, that matches other crude data. Except the Japanese are a bit lower than other thing I seen

But it won't answer YOUR well phrased queries!

The dilemma is that we know VIRTUALLY NOTHING about the profiles of end users.

One thing I can tell you is that TW has MULTIPLE AUDIENCES. I post on Twitter & on Telegram sometimes and they are different from here. Very.

TBH *I* would like to know whether there is a "HUGE silent majority" of end users. I suspect there is. But have no way of quantifying it. TW use leaves LITTLE traces.

Thoughts

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

OGNSYA wrote

For example, if we find that most TW users are tech-savvy

HOW would you determine that?

I think the best you can hope for, lacking inbuilt tracking, is to do a poll here on GG that gives some kind of map of minds here.

But are they typical users?

 

I can tell you *I* am NOT a programmer and have no interest in being one whatsoever. My interest in TW is to get stuff done in a precise way.

Only an idiot would try to be something they are no good at. My background is become slightly tech-savvy-with-HIGH-RELUCTANCE.

I'm interested in public apps most. TW for Anthropologists. TW of Document Writing etc. Tech as an end in itself is meaningless to me.

Just thoughts

TT

[Mark S.]

On Friday, June 19, 2020 at 9:28:56 AM UTC-7, TiddlyTweeter wrote:

OGNSYA wrote

For example, if we find that most TW users are tech-savvy

HOW would you determine that?

PMario's stats suggested 30% linux use, which is 15 times higher than is common. This does suggest the community skews techy. And no, don't tell me how non-techy linux is. I'm using it now. I've used it off and on for more than two decades. It is techy.  It's less techy than it was 20 years ago -- you don't have to recompile the kernel to install a scanner, like I had to once. But it's still techy.

I'm interested in public apps most. TW for Anthropologists. TW of Document Writing etc. Tech as an end in itself is meaningless to me.

My thought is that someday everyone will program, at least at some level. Like if you don't know "Tea, Earl Grey, Hot", you'll spend a lot of your time very thirsty.

[TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Mark

You likely know I can vaguely wing it. And respect people who love code a lot.

Yet your "Earl Grey, Hot" is an instruction to specialist boilettere, not Samson The Nerd, I hope :-).

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

Mark S. wrote:

PMario's stats suggested 30% linux use, which is 15 times higher than is common.

Right. Here is NOT ordinary.

TT 

[Birthe C]

Mark S,

I might not be the only one using Linux on old laptops. I have to use something I can afford.

After several years of use I also quite like it. I guess you know by now, that I am absolutely not techy.

Birthe

[TW Tones]

Birthe et al

To demonstrate the diversity of tiddlywiki demographics

Birthe demonstrates the linux user who is not techy, well I am techie who does not use Linux. Having detailed knowledge of windows. Whilst I know my way around Linux, its embedded in many things. I don't like having to remember thousands of acronyms or cute names that don't reflect what they describe.

Whilst being techy I have being a professional translator between tech and plain language.

Whilst being techie I crave knowledge that transends the tech we use to record it.

My point being there are as many demographic groups for tiddlywiki as there are users.

My interest is catering to a universal user, my concern is to identify what wikis resonate with people not who they are (although it would be interesting to know).

I wonder if we knew a lot of our users had pet turtles, there would be too many turtle wikis and people would turn away unless they had turtles?

Love the discussion
TW Tones

[Birthe C]

TW Tones,

If as lot of users had pet turtles, there would be many turtle wikis, TW users would not turn away, but you might see wikis collecting recipes for the best turtle soup, ragout or similar.

The internet is full of users having cats, image albums, blogs, websites, youtubes and more. Should we use Motovun Jack more to get more users?

All of them could use Jeds Pet Diary

Birthe

On Saturday, June 20, 2020 at 3:25:36 AM UTC+2, TW Tones wrote:

I wonder if we knew a lot of our users had pet turtles, there would be too many turtle wikis and people would turn away unless they had turtles?

TW Tones

[PMario]

On Friday, June 19, 2020 at 6:46:01 PM UTC+2, Mark S. wrote:

On Friday, June 19, 2020 at 9:28:56 AM UTC-7, TiddlyTweeter wrote:

OGNSYA wrote

For example, if we find that most TW users are tech-savvy

HOW would you determine that?

PMario's stats suggested 30% linux use, which is 15 times higher than is common.

"Let it be" 3%, which pushes the factor closer to 10 times ;) See: https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2020/06/linux-marketshare-increased-again-last-month-and-do-did-ubuntus

 

This does suggest the community skews techy. And no, don't tell me how non-techy linux is. I'm using it now. I've used it off and on for more than two decades. It is techy.  It's less techy than it was 20 years ago -- you don't have to recompile the kernel to install a scanner, like I had to once. But it's still techy.

I'm pretty sure that TW is a popular wiki for students, where low cost OS is "a thing". So we can expect more Linux users there. There are some highly specialized distributions, that may work very well in such communities.

-mario

[OGNSYA]

Hi all!

Tones:

My idea is to get a really broad idea of the demographics. Nothing as precise as pet types :)

If we did find that most TW's are about turtles, maybe that would help understanding how to make TW more flexible.

About trying to actually measure users/usage:

It seems very realistic to simply have some sort of permanent poll online, and link to it from TW's download page (so people see it when first downloading, and periodically as they update it). Most TW users tend to be passionate about it, and would probably be happy to share how they use it. 

Mark: 

Good insight regarding Linux use. I agree it suggests techy-ness

In general, I think its safe to say that most TW users are somewhat tech inclined.

Which brings me to the next question: what is TW's goal?

Breaking that up into two simpler questions:

1. What are the things TW is trying to achieve?

2. What is the priority of each of these things?

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I did find some hints here and there about what these could be (from reading the website, articles/posts, watching videos etc.), but nothing too solid (and certainly nothing too recent). 

From what I could gather (as a relative newbie) is that TW's objective is, first and foremost, to provide a flexible and powerful platform for note-taking and knowledge management. There also seems to be a desire to make this accessible to a broader audience (for example, by offering a less overwhelming initial experience for new users, and making the whole UI/UX more intuitive and modern), however this seems to be much lower in the agenda.

Would love to know answers from the more experienced TW on the questions above  (or at least comments on my guess above)

To be clear, my goal in asking these things is to understand TW. If any of my questions/comments sound critical in any way, I apologize. I certainly have my own opinions/wishes of what TW is and could be, but these are all still very raw and uninformed.

I also think having these things clearly defined (and publicly stated) could help the community (and newcomers) better understand what TW is (and wants to be) all about.

[TiddlyTweeter]

OGNSYA wrote:

Breaking that up into two simpler questions:

 

1. What are the things TW is trying to achieve?

I doubt a TW can think! :-) 

Beware of wrapping complex issues in simple imperatives! 

There is NO TW trying to do anything. Only many variant users with uses.

Actually I think opening up WHAT you imply in that sentence is a start of a research project.

IMO you not seeing that clearly enough!

My arrogant 2 cents.

Best wishes

TT

[OGNSYA]

Not arrogant at all! I'm learning :)

I understand TW isn't an entity on itself - I was just trying to simplify things.

Though I agree it makes sense to take one step back then, and perhaps ask:

Does the TW community have some sort of formal shared high-level roadmap?

(Of course, I'd imagine this existing in parallel to all the existing organic individual/collaborative efforts, as these are extremely valuable)

[TiddlyTweeter]

 OGNSYA wrote:

Does the TW community have some sort of formal shared high-level roadmap?

As far as active promotion goes I don't think there is one. 

There IS a common concern that Starters can grasp how to save & what a TW is on First use.

There is much concern that Starters Can Start well.

After that, not much.

TT

[Alex Hough]

Josiah,

I wrote my two recent "speaches" directly into the Google group web interface. I'm collecting them (in the first instance) by using a new gmail account to sign into the group. I decided to separate my TW related activities from everything else that comes into my gmail account.

I decided to do this after reading the post on problem solving [1] and following the link to the Thomas' TW [2]. I liked the mix of ideas -- Borges, TRIZ -- and the context. 

I wanted to add to a hypertext by responding to the forum post directly and evoking ideas from the wiki in a more ambiguous way with a thought of filling in the gaps later. 

I was also thinking of TiddlyWiki's identity from a very literal starting point: a non-linear personal web notebook [2] especially the "non-linear" bit. The SiteSubtitle or TiddlyWiki.com has constant for may years and I made a speculative leap: the people who use TW want to use a non-linear personal web notebook. At very least they are not put off by the text. I felt liberated by realising this and started to write something in a more experimental way, one which links to my new gmail account for a project I started just Before Lockdown (BL) -- The Cuckoo and Caddisfly). I chose the name Cuckoo and Caddisfly for a response to a call for artists to propose a structure in a woodland garden. I read Borges' "The Garden of Forking Paths" on night in the period I was paying attention into the brief. A "secluded house" is mentioned in the text, and the location for the proposed artwork was once part of an estate connected to secluded house. The brief emphasised "spirit of place" in garden design and asked for consideration of the garden designer and his client.  

Non-linear thinking (and texts - is it best to treat them both as the same thing?) can be seen "fork" in a garden path. James Russell's -- the garden designer in question -- original intention was to surprise people walking though an English woodland in spring by a bright optimistic signal that spring was on its way: a flowering rhododendron. Once a wow -- and still pleasant to look at -- the plant now has a network of sentiments attached to it and these seemed to come it mind. If the plant were a Tiddler in a TiddlyWiki I imagine there would be [[links]] to other tiddlers and there would be tags. I got thinking about non-linearity in tags, hierarchies and missing tags in hypertext. How could garden design evoke such a thought? I thought of the mis-match between the accessibility and complexity associated with walking round a garden compared to reading Borges. 

A few years ago I visited a garden explicitly designed with complex ideas at its core. The Garden of Cosmic Speculation brings idea from physics and the history of ideas into a post-modern context (one co-creator wrote books on post-modern architecture). It struck me that the wiki - hypertext - garden metaphor could work both ways, at the same time.

In TiddlyWiki we have "missing links" and "orphans" but we don't have a way of tracking hierarchies of tags. We can have a tiddler supported by multiple tags and some of those tags might be intended to mark position in a hierarchy. Jumping from a tiddler to a tag and then to another tag is a more difficult navigation than following the same number of links. Going up and down the ladder of abstraction only makes sense when there are small visible steps. I was thinking of situations, mechanisms and behaviors to make hyper-textual leaps up the ladders of abstraction and then along a few forked paths. And the other way, trying to trace a way down to solid ground from a far out thought.

In my Cuckoo and Caddisfly system I brought many concepts together under a new-to-me concept. I stumbled across the extended phenotype concept, the cuckoo and caddisfly feature in explanations of it. The garden in the brief holds Tai Chi classes in the walled garden zone. I thought of moving meditations in a garden, martial arts where pretending to be insects and birds are acceptable behaviours. Would it be similarly acceptable to think and dream in a garden with a mind charged with ideas from modern science and literature or would it be viewed as too strange, obscure and ... pretentious!?     

Here, on this thread and the "problem solving thread" I decided to experiment with using a context to develop my own ideas. Its a bit like a cuckoo laying an egg in a next that doesn't belong to her, but also like a caddisfly larva which uses material found in its river-bed surroundings to build its home [4]. I thought I'd build a hypertext from within some boundaries starting with two forum posts and the links from them.

Forum posts and links to examples of TiddlyWikis form a set of hypertexts within the TW community setting. I was thinking the forum posts I made could be starting points, I'd then bring the text I wrote into a TW. The highest level tag can be seen as those made under the cuckoo and caddisfly gmail account, then there is plain text with links and then -- hopefully -- a TW that fills in the gaps.

I am conscious that in other context posts like this would be way off topic, and I wouldn't normally make them in TW. But I took the idea that users are by definition non-linear friendly and there may be some value to readers. I am most grateful for the TiddlyVerse for sparking my imagination. Like many folk round the world I've not been getting out much recently... perhaps I've completely lost it!

[[peace]]

Alex

[1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/tTUKcHOObE0/VsWxm65eBgAJ

[2] http://thomasteepe-archiv.de/
[3] https://tiddlywiki.com/#%24%3A%2FSiteSubtitle

[4] https://www.thisiscolossal.com/2014/07/hubert-duprat-caddisflies/

On Thursday, 18 June 2020 01:02:42 UTC+1, TiddlyTweeter wrote:

Alex

I hope you are collecting your "speeches" somewhere! :-) ... by the neatness & footnotes I'm assuming you wrote this in a wiki? Yes?

Best wishes

Josiah

On Wednesday, 17 June 2020 22:53:44 UTC+2, Alex Hough wrote:

Tony said something on the thread that Thomas started to share his TW on the subject of problem solving: "its molding clay for the mind"[1]. I think these type of user are the ones Birthe identifies as the "many that we know nothing about."

Looking back into the history of of TiddlyWiki there have been some serious and high profile computer scientists such as Joe Armstrong. In his talkwith Jeremy "Intertwingling the Tiddlywiki with Erlang" [3] he starts by talking about Ted Nelson a pioneer of hypertext which Jeremy picks up on later in the talk.

Steve Schneider has used TW to teach hyper-textual and interactive writing. DesignWriteStudio [4] is a freely available resource built using a TiddlyWiki to help explore hyper-text and interactive texts. An early example of his work using TiddlyWiki is "Companion to Web Campaigning Kirsten A. Foot & Steven M. Schneider MIT Press, 2006"  [5]. There is a paper on TiddlyWiki being used as an interactive note pad to help teach science. [6]

Joe Armstrong talks about "all in oneness" and from reading his GitHub hosted TW he likes the fact that TW is a Quine ("a curiosity of computer science", says Jeremy in the talk), putting it at the top of  list [7].

I imagine that "those who we know nothing about" may include those who have come to TW with previous interests in the fundamentals of hypertext writing, computer science and research in general like Joe and Steve.

There's a long list of professional / expert developers with a passion for open source development. Eric Schulman is without doubt the longest standing example here.  The developers coming and going over the years tend not to be those following the to the latest fads and trends, perhaps because TW is not a technology which lends itself to commercialisation in the same way as being a master of a particularly in demand framework. I think many developers don't get TW, but those who do seem to be those with a deep understanding and application of the elegance of design. 

There is at least three doctors: Saq, Rizwan, Abraham. A missionary (Dave Gifford) and a  Mohhmaed chemical engineer. These people have become highly proficient TW developers. Saq talks about learning to code using TiddlyWiki in the recent Hangout [8]. There are some more hangouts planned -- currently on hold (get well soon Jeremy!) -- but they are something TiddlyWiki fan like myself are quite excited about. 

I think the best way of finding out about the users of TW is probably to start using TW and explore the eco-system. Because TW is an off line technology without data collection by design, I think traditional methods of analysis might not work so well. The community is small enough to get to know regular contributors and the issues they try to solve. 

 

Alex

[1] http://thomasteepe-archiv.de/

[2] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/tiddlywiki/tTUKcHOObE0/VsWxm65eBgAJ

[3] https://www.softwaretalks.io/v/6705/joe-armstrong-and-jeremy-ruston-intertwingling-the-tiddlywiki-with-erlang-code-mesh-ldn-18

[4] http://designwritestudio.com/

[5] https://web.archive.org/web/20061103082226/http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/0262062585/WebCampaigningDigitalSupplement.html#%5B%5BWelcome%20to%20the%20Web%20Campaigning%20Digital%20Supplement%5D%5D

[6] http://people.sunyit.edu/~krieseg/IDT590/Scrapbook/data/20111205115236/4-ithet-2006.pdf

[7]  https://joearms.github.io/#Index

[8] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvnqgfvohfM

On Wednesday, 17 June 2020 19:13:05 UTC+1, Birthe C wrote:

How would we know? Maybe the people here guess some numbers, but in reality TiddlyWiki is used by many that we know nothing about.

Birthe

[TW Tones]

Alex,

Once again you are responding from the demographic we share, the "odd intellectual" :) ?

Non-linear thinking (and texts - is it best to treat them both as the same thing?) can be seen "fork" in a garden path.

I think the fact tiddlywiki supports non-linear records and concepts ignores that fact it is also very good at any type of structure such as list/hierarchical, networks etc..., or no structure at all. This is the deficit model of description, the market is not good at "non-linear" so we define tiddlywiki as "non-linear" although it goes far beyond that. I wonder if tiddlywiki's catch phrase attracts more artists (with a tech bent) than techies as a result?

 

In TiddlyWiki we have "missing links" and "orphans" but we don't have a way of tracking hierarchies of tags. We can have a tiddler supported by multiple tags and some of those tags might be intended to mark position in a hierarchy. Jumping from a tiddler to a tag and then to another tag is a more difficult navigation than following the same number of links. Going up and down the ladder of abstraction only makes sense when there are small visible steps. I was thinking of situations, mechanisms and behaviors to make hyper-textual leaps up the ladders of abstraction and then along a few forked paths. And the other way, trying to trace a way down to solid ground from a far out thought.

We can do what we want in Tiddlywiki, I thus cant agree with this paragraph, ask and we can provide, if not already.

  

I am most grateful for the TiddlyVerse for sparking my imagination. Like many folk round the world I've not been getting out much recently... perhaps I've completely lost it!

Me too Alex, and for me it's value includes also sparking your (and others) imaginations.

 

Regards

Tony

[Alex Hough]

Tony, 

Building on 

1) "odd intellectual"  ... perhaps  people who are interested in learning things for themselves are attracted to TW. 

Standard intellectuals, academics within institutions perhaps use a standard kit: Word integrated with a reference manager. They are focused on producing texts in a particular format grounded in a literature typically requiring a connection to an institution to get hold of.

2) "artists (with a tech bent)" ... and / or perhaps techies with an artistic bent. The blending of tool making with text making is where it gets interesting for me. I'm explicitly  STEAM not STEM [1] in Cuckoo and Caddisfly mode, Brian Eno's thoughts [2] on the ecology of indie music in the UK inspire my thinking. 

TiddlyWiki's ecology is free from institutional and corporate influence and constraints, it's an indie scene, low fi, DIY, punk, grunge acid house not corporate rock or classical music. There's something of the avant-garde in the TiddlyVerse, it's always under development, we can all see the pre-release and the discussions around the tool. Everything is in the open, there is no immediately apparent financial reward from becoming an expert at TW. Intrinsic motivation [3] seem to be a main motivation for many users. 

TiddlyWiki, a Non-linear personal toolmaker,  the intertwingling of text and tool within a community of non-linear notemakers

Alex

[1] https://theconversation.com/explainer-whats-the-difference-between-stem-and-steam-95713#:~:text=STEM%20represents%20science%2C%20technology%2C%20engineering,arts%2C%20design%20and%20new%20media.&text=The%20main%20difference%20between%20STEM,explicitly%20focuses%20on%20scientific%20concepts.

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p033smwp

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Intrinsic_motivation

[Birthe C]

Alex, TW Tones,

Everything that can be collected will find some people doing it. Tiddlywiki is very good at collecting notes, texts, ideas, tasks and much more.

Some people cannot even stop again, become obsessed. That is of course neither you nor me ;-)

Think about it? Some are collecting physical stuff until they can barely enter their homes. (Read an article about that example today.)

Maybe that is the new users we are looking for, hoarders with a need to catalogue the stuff?

I like to "empty my brain" from a lot of thoughts in late evening. Danger being that I will end up staying up too late due to some problem, I'll try to solve. Giving up on the problem perhaps at some time, fall asleep immediately and wake up after a good sleep leaving me very refreshed and ready for the day.

Now I feel an urge to bring my cup of coffee to my computer and look at my wiki. More often than not, the solution is totally ready to be entered. It feels like magic.

Birthe

[TW Tones]

This looks like a shared experience Birthe.

[TiddlyTweeter]

LOTS in your post to comment on. Good stuff. I'll maybe start a new thread. So the OP here is not overwhelmed. A dopo.

Josiah, x

[OGNSYA]

Deep stuff!

I like those ideas, how TW appeals to the "odd intellectual", and how open/free it is.

Though I'm not sure I understand the implications of bringing this up in this thread: do you mean that the TW community is not interested in having a more accessible layer (in addition to - not instead of - the existing "odd" one)?

About TiddlyWiki's description: "a non-linear personal web notebook"

Indeed, this is often the first thing a new user will read/consider.

I like that it starts with "non-linear", as this is a very user-friendly way to hint at how TW is fundamentally unique. 

I understand Tones' concern that this might end up covering the fact that TW can also be used in more linear ways...

Other parts of that description seem more problematic to me.

"personal" suggests it only supports single-user usage;

"web" suggests it's web-based (and requires an internet connection);

"notebook" might suggest it's just for note-taking (rather than more robust uses).

I know this is all explained in the Getting Started tiddler, but for someone who is considering dozens of software alternatives, if the short description already describes what they don't want, this might be enough for them to not continue further. Maybe a better starting point would be the description shown in the Getting Started tiddler: "a unique non-linear notebook for capturing, organising and sharing complex information". A shorter version could be: "a unique non-linear fully customizable notebook"

[TiddlyTweeter]

OGNSYA wrote:

About TiddlyWiki's description: "a non-linear personal web notebook"

Indeed, this is often the first thing a new user will read/consider.

Given that "non-linear" has been around forever, it is worth mentioning that in early days of netology was idea of a "text-base" (="non-linear" now), rather than a "data-base". In those days social scientists like me were gyrating at the ridiculous constrictures of unfree definitions of "data". But the fact is the data-chunk model basically got a grip.

Its a slightly odd situation at large that you need convince users now that "non-linear" is sensible.

But the words "non-linear" are actually confusing. Its not that it is "non-linear", its that its "NON-determinate", meaning that meaning is not defined categorically by a database.

Thoughts

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

OGNSYA wrote:

A shorter version could be: "a unique non-linear fully customizable notebook"

How about just: "a decent notebook".

TT 

[Birthe C]

TT,

I know for sure I would have started using Tiddlywiki 2-3 weeks before with that subtitle. A decent notebook

I couldn't get my head around non-linear

Trying to get somebody to try tiddlywiki and the first question will be about the subtitle.

Birthe

[TW Tones]

Folks,

To me each and every tiddler, is a "decent note book", so this is the most understated catchphrase you can use in my view.

Actually, I am always working to conceptualise tiddlywikis place in the greater universe, carefully abstracting all its capabilities and possibilities, and coming up with a a general name is as difficult as it is, for me to encapsulate my 30+ years in IT, it is next to impossible.

However a different approach to classifying tiddlywiki and hopefully define it such that its user demographic recognises its value, may help.

I have come to believe tiddlywiki may in its maturity and with appropriate editions and plugins could revolutionise software use, why you may ask, is this overreach?

To me tiddlywiki is about democratising, making accessible to all, the power of programmable computers by providing a platform which many different user skills can make use of computers.

• It breaks the barriers that stop people building applications, websites, designing their own personal organiser, private or cloud/server solutions. 
• It permits the common person to make use of decades of development in computers without commercial or coded languages acting as access gates.
• Its a bit like when the development of printing presses empowered many to read and learn when prior it was only the priests and nobility who had access to recorded knowledge, in manuscripts that could not easily be copied and often locked away. They say printing the bible permitted followers to build their own relationship to it, rather than mediated by the priestly classes.
• Tiddlywiki provides people access to modern software without gate keepers.

Thoughts include

• Own Your own software
• A Software platform for all people to thrive on
• The keys to the Information technology kingdom
• Build Your Own BYO Software
• Do it yourself software DIYS

Thus an enthusiast like me has concluded that an investment in learning the tiddlywiki platform, is an investment of a life time, to empower me and those around me to make full use of modern technology. Its now not just a good bit of software but a "calling".

Regards

Tony

[TW Tones]

Tiddlywiki is it a PCMS

Let us coin the term

Private/Public Content Management System?


and Platform.

Then everyone in in its demographic

Tony

[PMario]

On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 3:31:25 AM UTC+2, TW Tones wrote:

Private/Public Content Management System?

and Platform.

hihi, I like this one. But if you already count the Ps.. .. It's more like a P³CMS ... the P from platform included. ..

If it is used using HYPER-protocol (former DAT-protocol) which is a "Peer to Peer" (P2P) protocol we can make it

Peer to peer, private/public CMS & Platform .... So counting the Ps it will be a P5CMS. ...

@OGNSYA ... sorry non of this is really "on topic" of the OP. ... But it it's too tempting.

just a thought

-mario

[Eric Shulman]

On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 5:05:04 AM UTC-7, PMario wrote:

On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 3:31:25 AM UTC+2, TW Tones wrote:

Private/Public Content Management System?

and Platform.

hihi, I like this one. But if you already count the Ps.. .. It's more like a P³CMS ... the P from platform included. ..

If it is used using HYPER-protocol (former DAT-protocol) which is a "Peer to Peer" (P2P) protocol we can make it

Peer to peer, private/public CMS & Platform .... So counting the Ps it will be a P5CMS. ...

Back in February I posted this one:

"Powerful Portable Programmable Platform for People" 

-e

[TW Tones]

Mario and Eric

After my reply I changed it to P to the n CMS when I came up with quite a few relevant p words other than Eric's thoughts.

Since reading your responces perhaps it could be P to the power of infinity CMS

Are we on to something? Where is TT?

regards
Tony

[Birthe C]

Eric,

I like your suggestion for the subtitle:"Powerful Portable Programmable Platform for People"

Short and friendly.

TW Tones, Pmario,

P to the n CMS

Would work best in some more in depth explanation.

Pmario,

HYPER-protocol (former DAT-protocol), sure we should use Beaker browser. but how?

Birthe

[PMario]

 

On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 3:02:30 PM UTC+2, Birthe C wrote:

Pmario,

HYPER-protocol (former DAT-protocol), sure we should use Beaker browser. but how?

I'm on it. .. I'm not 100% sure yet. The 1.0 workflow will change quite a bit as mentioned in an other thread.

-mario

[TiddlyTweeter]

As far as I understand BB the main problem with it is it uses a protocol no one uses?

Its very good. Very tight. Very secure. But how do you leverage it to get read universally?

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

I just realised I should NOT have posted that. This thread is losing the plot on the OP!

OGNSYA has interest in usage patterns.

My query now: How Relevant Is Beaker Browser to TW Uptake?

It seems not relevant to me.

Best, TT

[PMario]

On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 5:31:45 PM UTC+2, TiddlyTweeter wrote:

...

OGNSYA has interest in usage patterns.

My query now: How Relevant Is Beaker Browser to TW Uptake?

...

The whole system can have a very high impact. The hyper-protocol is a "federated system" by design. They call it hyper-swarm, we call it federation.

The underlying mechanisms used by HYPER protocol are complex. Beaker Browser is a GUI, that abstracts some of this complexity away, to be useful for "tech folks".

We need to "abstract" this complexity away to be useable for TW users. Once we have a practicable workflow for our users, it can have a big impact for TW. ...

There are some new terms, which are "alien" for the TW community atm. .. So we need to understand them and translate them into "our way of thinking".

-mario

[OGNSYA]

Love what Tones wrote about democratization. 

It would be great if TiddlyWiki could be something that not only technically-minded people feel they can get into, but also the more general audice (since I see myself in between those two groups, much closer to the second). Which is why I have been asking these questions...

I'd be careful about presenting all those (amazing) ideas all at once to a new user though. 

If the idea is to reach a wider audience, maybe it makes more sense to go step by step.

1. Present TW as a free, lightweight, simple, flexible tool for taking notes and organize content of all shapes and sizes.
   (Definitely mention that it is infinitely extensible, but not in a way that would make it seem like it's a requirement to get into that.)
2. The user should then be able to use TW to do a lot without going under the hood
3. However the option to go further/deeper is always there, available to the user, as menus items. Ready for when they feel confident to try it out.

I think TW is already very close to that as it is.

I like the discussion about the tagline. It definitely helps in understanding a broader strategy.

"Private/Public Content Management System" might be a bit too heavy... "Powerful Portable Programmable Platform for People" sounds cool, but maybe too vague. I liked Tones' use of the term "DIY" in this context (I never realized how DIY tends to always refer to physical/material stuff, as opposed to digital).

As I explained above, I'd suggest avoiding overwhelming people.

Maybe something with a lighter tone, like:

• TiddlyWiki: make sense of your information, in a way that makes sense to you

I also like the metaphor of a garden, which I see a lot in discussions about granular approaches to content management. But maybe not as a tagline... It does tend to sound a bit to hippy for those who don't get it.

[TiddlyTweeter]

Yeah. BUT.

There seem enormous problems to solve.

I doubt, very much, it is coming to your area soon.

I can't see it anywhere near a basic option yet. Or ever.

TT

[TiddlyTweeter]

 OGNSYA wrote:

Love what Tones wrote about democratization. 

Tones is very seductive. :) Likely wrong. :)

It would be great if TiddlyWiki could be something that not only technically-minded people feel they can get into, but also the more general audice (since I see myself in between those two groups, much closer to the second). Which is why I have been asking these questions...

WHAT is a general audience?

I'd say IF you not an uber-tech you interested in APPLICATIONS. TW DEDICATED to discrete ends. 

So applications seems a common sensible route. Most users have no interest in infinite thought on the meaning of whatever. They simply trying to DO things.

WHERE is the list of Wiki DEDICATED TO END PURPOSES? Categorized by purpose?

Best wishes

TT

 

[Birthe C]

TT,

If you are that common, you will not look around for applications, you will use what everybody and your dog are using.

Still dedicated example wikis are good. A starting point for the new user.

The general audience or potential user, is a user, that want something that works a little different and is prepared to put some effort into it. The user that knows, that things worthwhile, are often taking some time to learn. That is why we have to reassure the potential user, that TW5 is worthwhile and that this group offers great and friendly help.

That is also why I liked Eric Shulmans tagline. Not too heavy and scaring  - but also sending a message to more techy users, that more is to be found - and that more has to be listed.

Tony democratization is about power to the user, the techy and the not so techy ones. (The ones that need it most, i might add.)

Birthe

[TiddlyTweeter]

Birthe

One thing you miss in what I wrote is it actually assumes people are sensitive if they probe THIS far. And they are not looking for what the dog uses.

All your points are good. There simply reinforce what I wrote. Most are interested in SOLUTIONS.

Solutions in software relate to "application" fields. In TW we have no decent SHOWCSE of them. Full stop.

TT

[TW Tones]

TT +  OGNSYA

 

Tones is very seductive. :) Likely wrong. :)

TT, If you are going to make such specific statements I would like to to put up an argument.

I would also urge to to recognise this is already part of tiddlywikis philosophy, from open source, to controlled development and making it usable for the common person.

To me it is not can tiddlywiki democratise access to Information technology, it does, the question is can it do it at scale? We greatly under-utilise computing in today's world - believe it it not, the gap between those empowered and those not continues to grow, even generations have being "written off" as ever understanding it, and it will happen in future generations as well. 

OGNSYA

Part of identifying the demographics it would be interesting to see the keywords used to search for tiddlywiki and related solutions. That why the aforementioned CMS was raised. 

We still hear friends advise you need a CMS (Content Management System) or Website, content is an abstraction that includes a lot of things.

I am confident we should coin this below with emphasis on CMS but the rest to generate curiosity and a sense of the unlimited, as non-linear did for me.

Programmable, Private, Public, published, personal, process, platform etc...

What is 

someone may ask

Infinite possibility Content Management System, for everyone

It is a Content management system with infinite possibilities, we also found many words beginning with P are needed to describe many of its possibilities.

N is multiple P's or n for to the power of non-linear

But the way the above was written in wikitext.

I'd be careful about presenting all those (amazing) ideas all at once to a new user though. 

I totally agree

Regards

Tony

[TW Tones]

For me I want our demographic to be everyone, even if it is still a work in progress.

Infinite possibility CMS IPCMS

Forget Intellectual Property and adopt Infinite Possibilities for any content.

Tony

[OGNSYA]

Tones, since the idea is to reach broader audiences, I still feel that it makes more sense to use much simpler names/descriptions (instead of mathematical formulas). Having said that, I really like your ideas and reasoning behind it all!

Going through the thread one more time, I feel that all the ideas and arguments presented fit together nicely, if we consider how flexible TW can be. In one end there is the coder, able to manipulate/develop; on the other end, the most casual user, that only has access to the content. Then there is the whole spectrum in-between.

What I (and some others) are talking about is making sure this full scope is always available, but never imposed.

As mentioned before, the idea of bringing in more casual users is not about diminishing TW's potential. On the contrary, making the top level more user-friendly wouldn't change the experience to experienced users. But it would make a huge difference in making it less daunting for new users. Even if these new users use just 1% of TW's potential, that's already much more than most comercial software out there.

On top of that, as people get comfortable with TW, they would be able to gradually get more into it. The DIY analogy Tones made works well here. On one end, we have people who have workshops and professional tools, and can build any furniture from scratch. On the other end, Ikea people, who just want a table. Here is what TW could be: a table, ready for use, but which also comes with a box of tools, which the user is free to ignore. Then one day they'll notice the table is a bit wobbly due to the floor being slanted. They'll ask in the forum how to fix that. People will explain: "Open the toolbox, get tool A and just do this simple operation X". The user will feel very empowered (despite it being such a basic operation). Gradually they'll explore more of these options/tools. The one day they'll feel the need to have a little drawer under the table, and they'll realize they know how to use the tools to do it. Suddenly they're building their own furniture. 

But most people will never reach that point if they feel overwhelmed to start using TW in the first place..

[Birthe C]

OGNSYA,

Exactly.

It will not be necessary for every new user of course, but the best thing I did for myself, when I started using TW5 was to start from empty, and write down everything i found out to do. Everything i tested. After sometime it got refined and it has been better and better through the years. Now it is the place for me to find answers to a lot of my questions in a language I understand. Language difficulty can also make things more difficult. After all TW users come from all over the world.

Birthe

[TW Tones]

Very Good Metaphor;

Lets run with the Ikea Flat pack and tools metaphor. 

IT Furniture.

Regards

Tony

[TW Tones]

For Home and Office