Search

Ideas that are…

Search Ideas


2293 ideas match your query.:

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, about 1 month ago

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, about 1 month ago

Given #2877, will this still be the case?

#2881·Benjamin Davies, about 1 month ago·CriticismCriticized1

So I’m open to replacing the word ‘discussion’ with a more general word. It should still communicate a sort of ‘grouping’ of ideas but need not be as narrow as ‘discussion’. Would that help?

Certainly. I think this makes a lot sense.

I think ‘entry’ is my favourite of the ones you mentioned (and of some others I explored with Gemini). ‘Topic’ is also alright, but seems more leading than ‘entry’. I like ‘entry’ because it seems the most agnostic to user intent, while also working fine with UI elements.

#2880·Benjamin Davies, about 1 month ago

Related: #2844

#2879·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

I still think that Veritula already offers what you want – posting a single, top-level idea that is structured any way you like, to a new discussion whose title can be as open-ended as you like – but I’m sympathetic to your motivation.

Not every user is always interested in starting a discussion. Maybe they just want to put some information out there. And although others should still be able to discuss that information, criticism chains and all, that may not always be their primary motivation for posting the information in the first place.

So I’m open to replacing the word ‘discussion’ with a more general word. It should still communicate a sort of ‘grouping’ of ideas but need not be as narrow as ‘discussion’. Would that help?

ChatGPT suggestions:

Topic, thread, subject, space, entry, note / post / piece, context, cluster.

It’s also worth considering what each word would sound like in terms of UI elements. For example, ‘Start a new topic’, ‘Share a space’, etc.

#2878·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

You wrote in #2856:

… is there anything wrong with just titling a discussion 'Karl Popper' and then putting the equivalent of an encyclopedia article in the about section?

If you are willing to do that, I don’t see the need for this new feature.

#2877·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

See #2765. People can make discussions as general as they want. So there need not be any silo-ing.

#2876·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

… is there anything wrong with just titling a discussion 'Karl Popper' and then putting the equivalent of an encyclopedia article in the about section?

About sections are for context or background info, not content.

#2875·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

… is there anything wrong with just titling a discussion 'Karl Popper' and then putting the equivalent of an encyclopedia article in the about section?

Yes. About sections can’t be part of criticism chains.

#2874·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

They’re not supposed to, see #2871.

#2873·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

Since discussions themselves are criticisable…

They’re not, see #2871.

#2872·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

I am struggling to understand what it means to criticise a discussion.

Top-level criticisms don’t criticize the discussion as a whole. They’re just criticisms of something. Anything. It depends on context.

For example, top-level criticisms in the Veritula – Meta discussion are often bug reports. So they’re criticisms of Veritula.

#2871·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

their own personal

Double (triple?) tautology

#2870·Dennis Hackethal, about 1 month ago·Criticism

is largely enabled to

can

#2869·Dennis Hackethal, about 1 month ago·Criticism

each individual

I see several opportunities for simplification of language in this idea. The quote above is one of them. You could instead say ‘everyone’ or ‘people’.

#2868·Dennis Hackethal, about 1 month ago·Criticism

Doesn’t sound as serious/legitimate as I’d like in this context.

#2867·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

The Open Society

This is the political philosophy …

I haven’t read that book but it seems weird to call a society a philosophy. You sure that’s what Popper means?

#2866·Dennis Hackethal, about 1 month ago·Criticism

lead

led

#2865·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

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

Posting a sibling on an existing discussion is far easier.

#2863·Dennis HackethalOP revised about 1 month ago·Original #2862·Criticism

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

Posting a sibling on an existing discussion is far easier.

#2862·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticized1

That’s what notifications are for. You’d want to hit the bell icon for each discussion and at the top of the page listing all discussions. Then you’ll be notified of every activity on existing discussions, and of new discussions. The notification page keeps track of read vs unread notifications.

#2861·Dennis HackethalOP revised about 1 month ago·Original #2770·Criticism

You forgot to count comments on older versions of ideas.

#2860·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago·Criticism

Broken links

#2859·Dennis Hackethal, about 1 month ago·Criticism

Broken link

#2858·Dennis Hackethal, about 1 month ago·Criticism