Veritula – Meta

See full discussion
  Log in or sign up to participate in this discussion.
With an account, you can revise, criticize, and comment on ideas.

Discussions can branch out indefinitely. Zoom out for the bird’s-eye view.
Tom Nassis’s avatar
Tom Nassis, about 1 year ago·#501·· Collapse

Veritula should have a section with a list of all its current members.

For now, people just have profiles.

But having a list of members would build a sense of rapport between the participants.

And would promote a greater flow of communication.

CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 year ago·#504·· Collapse

Good idea. I’ve added this to my list of features to implement.

Tom Nassis’s avatar
Tom Nassis, about 1 year ago·#550·· Collapse

Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 year ago·#514·· Collapse

Done as of 6251b6a, see veritula.com/members.

Criticism of #501
Tom Nassis’s avatar
Tom Nassis, about 1 year ago·#551·· Collapse

Thank you, Dennis.👍

Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 year ago·#515·· Collapse

[H]aving a list of members would build a sense of rapport between the participants.

Just so you know, although I’ve implemented the list of members, I do want to be clear that Veritula is not meant for socializing.

Tom Nassis’s avatar
Tom Nassis revised about 1 year ago·#553·· Collapse

I know what you mean, but Veritula unavoidably facilitates public (i.e. social) interactions, no? Of a certain kind, to be clear. Ideas, ideas, ideas.

2nd of 2 versions
Dennis Hackethal’s avatar
Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 year ago·#562·· Collapse

Well, discussions are necessarily a ‘social’ activity in that they involve at least two people, yes. I just don’t want Veritula to be yet another social network.

In a mixed society, people can prioritize truth seeking or fitting in but not both.