pages this page emerged from
pages that emerged from this page
In a carburator gas and air get mixed. The engine burns this mixture. Only the correct mixture makes it run optimal. Small deviations of too much gas or too little gas in the air cause a large decrease of power.
On wiki our air is time. We have to apply the right amount of … wikiness? … on it.
To my feel the mix for wiki as it is now is too fat. Release choke! This thing you activated to start the engine - once upon a time, cars don’t have such anymore (engines now do it automatically). And, very right, giving too much air and too little wikiness destroys an engine within minutes. Therefore experiment outsides first. But I think there is potential behind it.
Someone has an idea for where on oddwiki to test it? Let’s let a little wind blow!
Well, I use it: create or edit today’s page. It’s terrific, I think. It’s so good, it tells so clearly to people that on this site pages can be edited by everyone, it so much tells the main and most important information that I put it first in the [GotoBar? go-to-bar].
When seeing the new domminance of day-pages think about if we coudn’t somehow tag single contributions on day-pages and include them in the relevant wiki-pages. At the end of the document-mode part. Newest daypage contribution on top.
blikified or newly created have been for now
Hello. Would it be appropriate to suppose introducing certain changes to community-wiki, in fact turn it into community-bliki? (don’t worry, wolves are not ashamed to admit to be wolves, so the name stays community-wiki, which we are, n’est-ce pas?)
I tuned around on Mattis-Manzel-bliki
Don’t misunderstand me, please. Talk about it. I think the barrier to enter, even comment occasionally without really entering would be lower with a day-page system a bit more dominant than it is here now. “create or edit today’s page” up to the left - so everyone immediately understands: this stuff is editable. I think using “more” css, with a picture is simply sexy and we should’t be without it.
Well, just talk about it.
I think it would shift the focus away from page titles. Page titles are important because these turn into the “words” with which we can write more and better pages. The current system serves our LinkLanguage.
agree on the importance of (editable) titles. It would be just a small part of the communication for the good advantage to have a lower entrance barrier (as you say, it has to be marked comment - or day-page - to work). Or we kinda swap completely to the contiousness stream day-pages and only tag contributions including them revertly chronologically after the document mode in the respective wiki-pages. Or something in between which we do not quite know what it will look like.
Let’s experiment with this elsewhere, first. This LinkLanguage aspect is very important to me.
You know I don’t like your “clean linking” scheme – and I don’t like it for the very same reason: I believe that using the exact same page titles again and again is the process that allows us to reuse page titles like words: We recognize them by their shape. “Clean linking” destroys this shape, changing case and adding whitespace – it’s not just the grammatical inflections that we know and expect from the language.
I see the wiki as a common system where diverging interests and motivations exist in a dynamic equilibrium. If we open a release valve by making it even easier to post to day pages, maybe even add a calendar, and generally emphasize our blog features, then our internal pressure will move the entire system in this direction. Instead of a collection of thoughts around certain words (our page titles), we get a collection of thoughts through time. Arranging thoughts along a time axis turns the thing into a linear conversation. Old things are forgotten.
I know that we’ve talked about ChangeFailure before, and how maybe we should forget old things on a wiki. I didn’t agree at the time and I don’t agree now.
On WikiWeblog I argued that there is no strict line one can or should draw between wikis and blogs. That doesn’t mean, however, that a site should incorporate all features. Architecture leads people. It enables or disables SoftSecurity. It acts as a GuidePost. That’s why each site should carefully choose the features it wants or does not want.
In our particular case, I think it might make more sense for everybody interested in this to apply for write access to the CommunityWikiBlog. Then, use the blog as a blog. And if something interesting comes of it, move it here.
If the blog takes over, that’s cool. We can FishBowl this wiki and move to the blog. Or try something new elsewhere, eg. on Oddwiki. Use NearLinks to this site and Meatball, add more Bliki features, and go with it.
Thanks alex, I agree that we should first experiment elsewhere with it.
[en] mattis, wikiness is exactly the point, let’s space out on that a little more. Up on every page there’s a link in a menu called bag-of-the-day (contribution or someting)
clicking that you get a new day-page, a new bag like 2006-04-22/1. Here is where you write your contribution and link it to other day-bags, like you already did on this page with the former day-page and on relevant wiki-pages (that are links that already have a name), just like you already have descibed it above. What still misses is the possibility to fold in and out (open and close) such links on the pages they get “cited” on. Was it that you meant with “including”.
Like that you can use combine the single contributions to different pages (you can use them in different contexts).
Then it only lacks a convenient way to name certain day-bags that turn into gathering-point for other bags in a speaking (a meaningful) way (for 2006-04-17 it was “wiki-carburator”). That way you can create every page (certainly every day-bag has a backlink showing in what contexts it is used in).
[de] mattis, wikiness ist genau der punkt, lass uns das noch weiter ausspinnen . oben auf jeder seite ist ein menü-punkt “tages-tasche” (“bag”, “beitrag” oder so ähnlich) .
wenn du da drauf klickst, erhälst du eine neue tages-tasche mit laufender nummer, z.b. 2006-04-22/1 . hier schreibst du deinen beitrag rein und verknüpfst ihn mit anderen tages-taschen (wie hier z.b. mit 2006-04-17) oder relevanten wiki-seiten (d.h. verknüpfungen, die bereits einen namen haben), also so, wie du e.s bereits auf WikiCarburator beschrieben hast . was noch fehlt, ist die möglichkeit, diese links auf den seiten, wo sie zitiert werden, aus- und einzuklappen (aus- oder einblenden) . oder meintest du das mit “include them”? .
so kannst du die einzelnen beiträge zu verschiedenen seiten kombinieren (in den verschiedensten zusammenhängen benutzen) .
fehlt nur noch eine bequeme möglichkeit, einzelne tages-taschen, die zum sammelpunkt von anderen “bags” werden, mit einem zusammenfassenden (sprechendem (aussagekräftigen)) namen zu versehen (im falle von 2006-04-17 z.b. “wiki-carburator”) . auf diese weise kanst du jede seite erzeugen . (jede tages-tasche hat selbstverständlich eine rückzeiger-liste, die anzeigt, in welchen zusammenhängen sie vorkommt)
Hm. Lemme say some encouraging words. When people first heard about wiki most of them thought “this can’t ever work”. And it was the same with cars before.
What about a timestamp for pagenames? 2006-04-23/13-46-17 13:46 and 17 seconds (goodbye am and pm ). That would finally give wikiadmins a good reason to set the clock right and wikiusers a good reason to define their timezone. See it as a global cortex, you could track back ideas to where they sprouted, find out about the circumstances and learn. Man, this is going to be way exiting!
I think, we are in a kind of situation here. I think we should try them all
And then we should meet back on the thingie that works best.
And - wiki-wiki - we should do it fast.
*completely isn’t right. There are regular wiki-pages containing the document mode part. But all thread mode is constructed by including single pages = contributions. Every thread-mode contribution a new page. So it will be not completely but 97% or something.
Mattis, I like the WikiCarburator metaphor. Although, I would add that the “choke” is generally there to help an engine receive a richer fuel-air mixture until the engine warms up. The “choke” is supposed to slowly open as the engine gradually warms to operating temperature. Maybe this can inform your metaphor? Maybe not
I have attempted to apply your WikiCarburator concept to the Social-Synergy-bliki. The idea that I have is to continue to write posts to my typepad blog software, and to the other blogs I write for. Then, I’ll import those posts to a bliki day page and encourage people to tear into them, and hopefully useful “eternal” wiki pages will emerge from that. I’ll link to the respective bliki daypage in each blog posting I make, on every blog I write for. I will also encourage people to link to material within other wikis when appropriate, as you all have been doing here in communitywiki. Soon, I’ll figure out how to fill in the wiki-node page and get that done, too.
The overall concept is to try to try and weave what I am working on and posting to different blogs into the wiki ecology. I also am going to encourage other bloggers to do the same, and encourage them to learn WikiWay concepts and apply them. I believe that bloggers could connect, not just through comments,and trackbacks, but also through wikis. I think that people can start out with the easy format of jotting down thoughts in blog postings that take advantage of all of the builtin linking, trackback, keyword, and RSS features of blog software. Yet, they can also take advantage of the TheoryBuilding inherent in wikis. There is definitely a potential for useful convergence there, and I hope to help develop it.