Veritula – Meta
When a reader comes to a Veritula post via a link, the site should let them know if there is a superseding revised version of it, and if they would like to see that version instead. When I share things with my friends, I want them to see the most current version, not the version that corresponds to the link they have been given at some point in the past.
Right now it depends on the user seeing that it is not the most recent revision on their own.
Bug: When I try to type a top level idea into a discussion on my phone, the text is covered by the keyboard.
Veritula should have a 'Posts' tab next to the 'Discussions' tab, where people can browse the things people post on their profiles.
But having a separate model isn’t exactly keeping things simple either.
#4416·Dennis HackethalOP, about 2 months agoThat would prevent existing discussions from being embedded on other sites. But why prevent that?
To keep things simple. This is just an MVP.
Extend the existing Discussion model to have a nullable embed_url. An embedded discussion would not have a title.
#4415·Dennis HackethalOP, about 2 months agoCreate an
EmbeddedDiscussionmodel, separate fromDiscussion.
That would prevent existing discussions from being embedded on other sites. But why prevent that?
Create an EmbeddedDiscussion model, separate from Discussion.
#4410·Dennis HackethalOP, about 2 months agoOption 1: when you create a discussion, an embed code is shown, which you can paste anywhere.
That would mean people couldn’t programmatically use embed codes, like on their blogs. They would always have to manually go into V and create a discussion first.
Option 2: an embed code is shown on your profile, with a page-url attribute you fill in. That’s the page where you place the code.
Option 2: an embed code is shown on your profile, with a page-url attribute you fill in. That’s the page where you place the code. The first time someone posts a comment, the associated discussion is created. Instead of a title, the discussion gets assigned the URL. That way, people seeing the discussion on V can open the URL for context.
Option 2: an embed code is shown on your profile, with a page-url attribute you fill in. That’s the page where you place the code.
Option 1: when you create a discussion, an embed code is shown, which you can paste anywhere.
#554·Tom Nassis, over 1 year agoVeritula deserves to scale to the size of Wikipedia.
But it never will, unless its users innovate.
How can the global success of Wikipedia inspire Veritula?
#3419·Dennis HackethalOP, 4 months agoIdea: voice spaces, like Twitter spaces, except an AI generates a transcript and automatically turns it into a discussion tree, with criticism chains and all.
This seems overkill for now. If people want to do this off-platform and then feed it into Veritula, they can do that.
#4262·Dennis HackethalOP, 3 months agoAnother idea: letting users post ideas to their own profile. Such ideas wouldn’t be part of a discussion.
Implemented as of ecc72ff. Check your profile.
#2666·Dennis HackethalOP revised 6 months ago‘Veritula’ is a difficult name, people don’t know how to spell or pronounce it. They can’t easily remember it.
There's something to be said for a degree of complexity and novelty to a name. It lends air of thoughtfulness, and could spark curiosity in potential new users.
#4356·Tyler Mills, 2 months ago'Veritula' is not a difficult name as compared to other highly successful explanatory enterprises, like 'Veritasium.'
See also: "Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell", the highly successful educational YT channel. I know people who are big fans, and yet can't pronounce the name correctly.
#2666·Dennis HackethalOP revised 6 months ago‘Veritula’ is a difficult name, people don’t know how to spell or pronounce it. They can’t easily remember it.
'Veritula' is not a difficult name as compared to other highly successful explanatory enterprises, like 'Veritasium.'
Easier than ‘Veritula’, though. At least it’s a known word.
#2962·Dennis HackethalOP revised 6 months agoThe red ‘Criticized’ label shows how many pending criticisms an idea has. For example ‘Criticized (5)’ means the idea has five pending criticisms.
But if there are lots of comments, including non-criticisms and addressed criticisms, it’s hard to identify pending criticisms.
There should be an easy way to filter comments of a given idea down to only pending criticisms.
As of 8e0a6e1, comments on each idea are shown in the following order: criticisms first, regular comments last. Within each category, uncontroversial comments are shown first. Lastly, comments are sorted by creation date (ascending).