Activity Feed

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2902.

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?
I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

#2902·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?

This is ambiguous. To be clear, are you asking if I would like to make an explicit personal methodology for using the site, as part of my effort described in #2899? Or are you inviting me to formulate an explicit methodology for users of Veritula in general? (I realise these aren’t mutually exclusive.)

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2929.

I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.

For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.

I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.

For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2902.

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?
I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

#2902·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.

For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2921.

‘Context’

#2921·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

Too jargon-y.

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2908.

This change is on purpose. The zoom feature was buggy. After zooming out far enough, the navbar and footer got cut off on the right. So I replaced it with proper scrolling.

Would you say zooming was indispensable or just nice to have?

#2908·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

It means that I have to scroll sideways to see the end of each line in a paragraph, which makes it more difficult to read ideas. It feels quite bad to use, compared to using Veritula on my computer, where the entire width of a paragraph is visible at all times.

A solution might be to adjust the mobile site dynamically to fit the user’s phone width.

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #2918.

‘Note’

#2918·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

Doesn’t communicate a grouping of ideas.

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #2916.

‘Space’

#2916·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

Sounds like a voice chat (like Twitter spaces)

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #2920.

‘Piece’

#2920·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

Doesn’t communicate a grouping of ideas.

  Dennis Hackethal criticized idea #2919.

‘Post’

#2919·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

Doesn’t communicate a grouping of ideas.

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Cluster’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Context’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Piece’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Post’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Note’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Entry’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Space’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Subject’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Thread’

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

#2912·Dennis HackethalOP, 1 day ago

‘Topic’

  Dennis Hackethal submitted criticism #2912.

‘Discussions’ are too narrow a term for a collection of ideas. See #2878.

While ideas should always be ‘discussable’, that doesn’t mean everyone who wants to share an idea always wants to start a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there.

  Dennis Hackethal addressed criticism #2881.

Given #2877, will this still be the case?

#2881·Benjamin Davies, 1 day ago

#2877 doesn’t mean you should put entire articles in the about section. (That’s still what top-level ideas are for.) It means that, if you’re willing to use the about section for that, then by your own logic there’s no need for this new feature.

  Dennis Hackethal commented on idea #2883.

Continuing on from #2882, would it make sense to enable users to criticise the discussion/entry/topic, such that it would render a criticism pill?

#2883·Benjamin Davies, 1 day ago

Maybe, see #2909.

  Dennis Hackethal commented on idea #2882.

If ‘discussions’ take on a broader form, like we have discussed up to #2880, would this change? What if a user wishes to express that they take issue with something written in the entry/topic body text? I suppose they would quote it in their top-level criticism.

#2882·Benjamin Davies, 1 day ago

If ‘discussions’ take on a broader form, like we have discussed up to #2880, would this change?

Maybe. It could depend on which term Veritula adopts.

What if a user wishes to express that they take issue with something written in the entry/topic body text? I suppose they would quote it in their top-level criticism.

Yes.

Maybe about sections should themselves be criticizable… In which case they’re just regular top-level ideas. So maybe I could just remove about sections for future discussions. I’ll mull it over.

  Dennis Hackethal commented on criticism #2886.

I am currently unable to zoom out to the full width when accessing Veritula on mobile.

#2886·Benjamin Davies, 1 day ago

This change is on purpose. The zoom feature was buggy. After zooming out far enough, the navbar and footer got cut off on the right. So I replaced it with proper scrolling.

Would you say zooming was indispensable or just nice to have?

  Dennis Hackethal revised criticism #2816. The revision addresses idea #2865.

The user could publish it as a separate independent idea, including a link to the idea they want to relate/refer to.

This is how relating discussions works currently. For instance, if I start a discussion on Bitcoin, I might want to connect it to the existing discussion on Zcash. At present, the only way to achieve this is by adding a link to the Zcash discussion within my new Bitcoin discussion.

I suspect you would agree with me that this approach to how discussions interact isn’t really an issue. I also think it wouldn’t be an issue for independently published ideas, for the same reasons.

Note: This has lead me to the idea that links within Veritula could be bidirectional. Each idea could have an option to display all other ideas that refer to it. I will submit this as a top-level idea in this thread.

The user could publish it as a separate independent idea, including a link to the idea they want to relate/refer to.

This is how relating discussions works currently. For instance, if I start a discussion on Bitcoin, I might want to connect it to the existing discussion on Zcash. At present, the only way to achieve this is by adding a link to the Zcash discussion within my new Bitcoin discussion.

I suspect you would agree with me that this approach to how discussions interact isn’t really an issue. I also think it wouldn’t be an issue for independently published ideas, for the same reasons.

Note: This has led me to the idea that links within Veritula could be bidirectional. Each idea could have an option to display all other ideas that refer to it. I will submit this as a top-level idea in this thread.