From time to time we might decide to publish an edited version of a page on the FrontPage. That’s the face we’re showing outsiders.
For internal stuff, we have this blog of ours: It collects DatePages. Add a new date page now! See TimeInWikis.
The ten most recent date pages (any language!) will be listed on this page. It is a multilingual blog. For French-only, see BlogFr.
For an overview of all the date pages of the current year, see our Calendar.
Considering that
– spammers have started adding spam to this wiki under my name,
– this is making despamming harder,
– very little new content has been added,
– there is practically no discussion of the content that has been added
I have decided to lock the wiki. Keeping it editable is no longer worth my time and emotional energy required to despam it.
The editor password can be gotten via email from me (kensanata@gmail.com) or any of the other former regulars. Check the sidebar to see who they are. Feel free to ask for the password and to continue contributing.
Wow, two spammers actually contacted me via email and asked for the password!
An essay about how communities can be hurt when a dynamic takes hold where the “best” people find themselves above average and then leave, which lowers the average level, which causes another wave of emigration:
http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/social-software-sundays-2-the-evaporative-cooling-effect/
Both of those sound very interesting to me!
Also, putting the End-of-Year date at the top is interesting, too.
I certainly agree that the End-Of-Year date is a useful place to container for annual Objectives.
Since I like to generalize everything as much as possible and I find Patterns quite useful in that regard, I’ve also taken the view that Start-Of-Year date is a useful place to accumulate Complete Tasks and their summary reports. After all, people are generally aware of what the current Date is, so it’s easy for them to distinguish the Accomplishments and Plans for a year as we progress through it. In fact, I’ve even generalized the concept of the time period to recognize the natural nestings of all of the components of Mcdy-mm-dd
mm:ss (basically ISO UTS)

Another example of my use of tags to index into the person dimension of TheArray? (that obviously needs some housekeeping since it return more than 25 bookmarks) is… http://delicious.com/HansWobbe/~lionK. Enjoy! 
Now that GPS receivers are common, I can easily get the coordinates of my current location (in Natural Area Code, decimal latitude-longitude, or UTM coordinates), find the corresponding point on a map, and tell others how to return to this location later.
Alas, there are many other, more difficult problems involved in addresses and mapping. Would one of the map wiki listed at http://wikiindex.org/Category:Maps be a good place to discuss those problems and possible solutions?
Thanks for posting this comment, David!
I’d be happy to engage further on this topic at just about any location what so ever. Since I am trying to PostWhereTheyRead? in order to find other activities I can contribute to, and since WikiIndex seems relatively active I’d be happy to use that site. If you think you’d prefer a more quiet environment for formative thoughts, we can use either of our Oddmuse Bliki(s).
Lately I’ve been using Amplify to post snippets of content from many sites. This automatically generates Tweets and DelIcioUs? bookmarks, which in turn generate RssFeed(s), so most of my activity is becoming widely distributed across many diverse sites. Many people I collaborate with are now asking me to share a specific tag that encodes Topic+GroupTimeperiod… values. The result is that we can use delicious almost like a relational database of destination URLs. Its almost what you are looking for, as defined by your Wiki:DavidCary’s page “I’m building a data store…” section.
overly abstract meta-discussion
When I stumble across something that I think is a Big Problem (in any field), I find it productive to
Alas, (b) has not been as successful as I had hoped. Out of the 5588 wiki in the index, I can usually find one or two that has a narrow focus that seems to include my pet problem du jour. But after I post to that wiki, I often discover that it is nearly a ghost town, with only one or two people active, and those particular people are so hyperfocused on some even more narrow sub-field that they don’t really have a lot to say about my question. Ah well – after I putting my thoughts down in tangible form and clarifying what the problem is and how I would recognize a solution, that often helps me think more clearly about it, even if I don’t get any feedback.
And, of course, sometimes I do get extremely useful feedback, even if it is merely a single sentence “There’s an entire mailing list dedicated to that subject at [some address]”.
specific details
The WikiIndex is pretty active, but WikiIndex may not be the best place to discuss time and place. I suspect people exist that have spent more time pondering location in formation and how to combine maps and time-sensitive information than you and I put together. In fact, the evidence suggests that there are so many of them that they have started at least a dozen wiki that I know about – listed at http://wikiindex.org/category:map – and quite likely several others. (Alas, far too many of those wiki are now offline).
Please go to http://wiki.gis.com/ and post a couple of paragraphs about this problem and ask where are the people interested in this sort of problem. I am tempted to go ahead and post there on your behalf, but I suspect that something would get lost in translation.
Maybe, a “showondate” feature can be useful too, for advanced dates. --JuanmaMP
I’ve found the use of future dates such as “showondate”(s) very useful. In my case, though, Calandars, Reminders and “in-boxes” quickly became very elaborate and quite personal. As a result, I’ve built most of these functions into my TiddlyWiki systems. Now that TiddlySpace? is becoming an accepted way of sharing MicroContent tiddlers, I’m beginning to consider ways of sharing more of the infrastructure.
HansWobbe recently posted to a post I wrote on my posterous: How do you work?
He ended his comment with:
CommunityWiki naturally came to mind.
Hans, would you be interested in talking about this here?
Anyone else have a thought on whether this is a good place or not a good place to hold this conversation? Perhaps there is a better place?
I pretty much like it. What immediately came to my mind were visualisations of ways to work among the people in a wiki-community. See who’s similar to your working style with a click. I’m not sure if I’d take part in all of a public survey, I’m influenced by the early 1980’ies Berlin-West dilettantism: “How much noise different to the other noise does my work produce?”, kinda. 
moved to HowDoYouWork
I’m wondering whether I should FishBowl this wiki and move it to some archive. What do you think? Is it worth keeping it open? The name is costing 1€/month with is not a lot, but given the low signal level, the SignalToNoise (spam) ratio is not too cool. Let me know.
I’m a bit of a pack rat, and I do refer to this wiki quite a bit more than I now post to it. For these reasons, and a few others, I’d be sad to see it go.
As a matter of fact, I’ve been thinking of asking if you’d like to link it into a “Not For Profit” foundation that I’m setting up. My objectives in thinking about this are…
Hm, interesting. I guess there’s value in keeping the URLs and content around. But it wouldn’t have to be a wiki – it could all end up being static pages, I guess. But perhaps you’re right. I might consider the value not too great – I haven’t referred to any of the pages in a long time – but if there’s value to some, perhaps we should be thinking about keeping responsibility where value is perceived. I guess there’s NonMonentaryCostOfOwnership? associated with a wiki: Checking RecentChanges, despamming, domain name renewal process, software upgrades, that kind of thing. So for some value of “link it into”, the foundation sounds like an interesting idea.
I must think about the WikiLifeCycle some more.
FWIW, I vote for keeping it as a wiki (maybe only editable by some at least?). I still refer to it quite a bit.
Hm, interesting. No problem, we’ll keep it running. I wonder we wrote about this before… Something about showing popular pages? Basically I want to know whether CW is being “used"… I’m not sure the list of Referrers can answer that.
I, like Sam, would appreciate having the wiki function preserved. In fact, for quite some time now, I’ve been wanting to have one of my servers replicate the “bliki” functionality since I think it would meet the needs of several of our clients to be able to manage the “second level” of sub-wikis as a set of collaborating Groups. This would be especially useful if some of the additional (business enterprise) privacy needs can be set up via a module like the quick “hack” that Bob Trower developed for us.
The only impediment that has prevented this from being done during the past couple of years is that my Admins are predominantly WinTel? types that are extremely reluctant to learn even the simplest LAMP tricks. As a result I’ve been sneak towards a LAMP infrastructure in millimeter by millimeter. Now, with AdManCa? Foundation coming on line, I have an opportunity to simply “slam” a solution into place that could easily look after all of these needs (and more). At the very least, I’d be happy to have AdManCa? “mirror” CW in order to provide some redundancy. After all, I feel a bit of a need to PayItForward?.
To - exceptionally
- apply a bit of wikipedia-culture here: keep.
I haven’t heard much noise, but perhaps Alex sees spam traffic that I do not, ..?
“Keep” ..!
Ok, ok. 
As for the spam: I don’t see a lot of spam in edits per month, but the ratio of spam to ham edits is relatively high, I feel – because nobody is actively writing on Community Wiki. Well, I’m happy to learn that people still refer to Community Wiki, so that’s cool.
Just to let you all know, I’ve not been adding all the recent spam just to make a point! 
Hi Alex. #Thanks:1 for keeping
Keep. Consider implementing a better captcha? A two word reCaptcha might discourage the spammers…
I’m not sure whether that would make a difference. Do you think the current spammers are posting automatically? It seems to me that they are in fact humans answering the question. If I replace the current captcha with reCaptcha, they’ll just keep answering it. Unless I also require people to answer a captcha for every edit. Ugh, that would pull usability down I fear. I think that BannedContent (which contains regular expressions matching URLs) is our best bet. Is reCaptcha still used to help digitize old books? At least the spammer’s energies would help do some good. 
my view on the recent spam situation, whoisi
SamRose applied the spam protection to the WikiNet wikis on his servers two years ago or so. We said “Bye spammers” in a talk post and eversince it’s quite. No spam at all. I haven’t been watching [[community-wiki?]] (no LocalNames here currently, I know
) much lately. But a few days ago I was proud to revert a dozen or two obviously manually spammed pages in this wiki - the spammer took 12 minutes - in two minutes.
That feels good, Alex!
http://whoisi.com unfortunately doesn’t exist anymore. It used a two word captcha as far as I remember.
February 2012 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
I am going to try to interface some of my other on-line activities to those pages here that are still very much of interest to me. At the very least, I will try to do this a few times during 2010-04, in spite of the fact that it looks like I’m going to be traveling about 50% of the time during 2010-04. – HansWobbe
I guess I’ll spend some time pondering these questions while I’m traveling for all all of June.
We may want to change the mode of CommunityWiki conversation.
Historically, we have operated in some pretty regular long-term conversations, punctuated by short or middle-length silences.
Now it seems we are more long-term in our silences, and short-term in our conversations.
Yet I am coming to think, this is okay.
To adapt to the new mode, I would propose that the CommunityWikiBylaws be amended to change the text from:
…to:
…if not 2 delegation for 2 years, removal after 8 years.
More casually (and more importantly,) I suggest the following questions (roughly) to help ourselves connect after we have been away for a time:
Whatever you have to say, please share.
I suspect that we may connect with each other every now and then, as we feel called, and then share what is going on for us, and whoever is available in whatever capacity, can share in the conversation that forms.
This is a “low frequency resonance,” (resonance being a subject invoked previously by HelmutLeitner,) but I don’t think a low-resonance frequency is “worse” than high-frequency conversation, or anything like that.
Thoughts?
I like the idea!
Low frequency is just the way it is, and that’s ok. In a way I’m in MissionAccomplished mode. The communities I wanted to create I have created (mostly Emacs Wiki and #emacs), I’ve found a work-life-balance that I’m getting used to. Perhaps it’s also an age thing. Settling down, cultivating my own garden à la Voltaire.
I haven’t found any community problems that I couldn’t solve with the processes we’ve discussed on this wiki and on Meatball. Weirdos calling my cell phone, difficult people that needed to be banned on IRC, conversations I’ve had with them and other operators, all of that was never new and exciting enough to prompt a post on Community Wiki.
I’ll write more on my namepage…
I, too, like the idea.
Personally, I’ve noticed that many of us are active on the “streaming” sites such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn? and this seems to provide a bit of a RecentChanges and RecentNews? effect. There is, however, also a need for an environment in which folks can collaborate in building larger pages (essays?) and I, personally, still find wiki technologies and their user communities a more productive way working on these.
I’m also finding it interesting to see how “social” web services are evolving. One way I’ve been trying to evaluate them is by posting an article a day at the “Amplify” site. … to be continued on my namepage.
Maybe we need to return to using the BannedContent page?
I have published my essay on on-line conflicts and the mimetic theory a the p2p blog.
I noticed that we somehow managed to set up an infinite loop using LocalNames. When I follow the link to MeatballWiki, I end up in an infinite loop.
At first I thought the problem was NearLinks. Checking the near links defined I found that MeatballWiki ought to point to MeatballWiki:MeatballWiki. Looking back at 2009-08-28 I found that the title attribute for the link says CommunityLocalNames.
Looking at the definition of local names, I see no link that defines a local name for MeatballWiki. Therefore the problem must be the import of local names. And indeed, the list of local names defined shows that the name MeatballWiki does in fact point to our own page, which doesn’t exist, which falls back on the local name, which redirects the browser to our own page, which doesn’t exist, which falls back on the local name, which redirects the browser to our own page, …
Fixing this is problematic, since I need to prove we’re going in circles by following the chain. An easier solution would be to simplify our setup – importing less namespaces in particular, or none at all if possible.
I propose we get rid of these namespaces:








Who needs them?
They’re either dead, or contain the infinte loop I’m referring to.
And actually, I don’t promote LocalNames in that style any more; That’s the thought about how to do it.
The “modern definition” of a “Local Names Namespace Description” is simply hyperlinks on a page.
Basically, you download an HTML page, and read off all the A HREF links, with the key being the linked text, and the value being the URL linked to, – and that is your namespace description.
Thus, every wiki’s PageIndex is automatically a local names namespace description, assuming they follow the usual practice of linking each pagename in the index.
See LocalNames for more information.