#@tPosting notes on your site is the “Hello World” of the independent web.
If you speak to the ideals of the #openWeb #decentralizedWeb #distributedWeb #federatedWeb #indieWeb or even #smallWeb, walk your talk: post your notes somewhere you control. ...
https://tantek.com/t5G_1 (twitter.com/_/status/1477799190382055425)
cygnoir[d] joined the channel
#[KevinMarks]Cluetrain manifesto was early on and a useful rallying one. Different audience than the declaration of independence of cyberspace
#[KevinMarks]There were a bunch of bills of rights too.
#[tantek]Kevinmarks indeed. I can't seem to find them now because now there are *actual* bills of rights re: social media etc. in various legislatures and they are dominating web search results
#[tantek]as opposed to the handwavy stuff from the mid-2000s
[James_Van_Dyne] and jamietanna[m] joined the channel
#jamietanna[m]Snarfed not sure if you're aware but a couple of times recently my feed reader shows a dozen or so posts of yours appear as new, despite showing their publish date as any time over the last week?
#[tantek]petermolnar, as you expressed about the need to be better about the wiki (less of a mess), unless you're in the middle of editing a dfn for "Long Now" that includes direct IndieWeb relevance, going to delete the page.
#petermolnarYou know that it's a community wiki and nit your personal one, right?
#[tantek]petermolnar, right, take your own advice there, that's why creating a new page has the burden of proof of indieweb relevance, not "draw my own conclusions on relevance"
#petermolnarIt is indieweb related in my resd I just ran out of capacity for today. Why does this bother you so much?
#[tantek]same reason it bothers you that the FB page was a mess
#[tantek]and we should adopt a practice of immediate direct relevance, otherwise deleting pages. if they're indieweb-relevant later, they can be recreated when there's a citation to provide
#petermolnarI'm going to walk away from this for now before I write rather angry words.
#[tantek]it's a triage problem, first, don't make the problem worse
#tantek.comdeleted /Long_Now "content was just link to org website, no indieweb relevance. can be recreated with an indieweb relevant dfn when there's an explicit connection/citation"
#tantek.comdeleted /longnow "content was broken redirect because the " is " shorthand in IRC still doesn't create redirects"
#tantek.comedited /whisper_tag (+207) "this article should be deleted unless someone wants to add IndieWeb relevance" (view diff)
#LoqiIt looks like we don't have a page for "social library platform" yet. Would you like to create it? (Or just say "social library platform is ____", a sentence describing the term)
#[tantek]"built on ActivityPub" is misleading at best, nothing is "built on ActivityPub" because it's not a platform/framework, it's a protocol. something can *support* ActivityPub
#[tantek]gRegor, any chance you could take a look at making that definition less jargony (like why is it relevant to users) ?
#zerojames[d][tantek] a quick Loqi message that says “A quick heads up that the see also section of web3 is getting a bit long. It may be time for a cleanup” or something with that sentiment would be useful.
#zerojames[d]So we can keep on top of any pages with excessively long See Also sections whose content can be merged into the main page body.
#[tantek]that's a good suggestion, would be even better if Loqi could point to a subsection of /wikify that provided guidance for how to "clean up" / merge-in See Also additions into the core of the article
#Loqimanual until it hurts is an indieweb principle of resisting automation until you have done it enough times to really understand it, and know that it is worth doing https://indieweb.org/manual_until_it_hurts
#[tantek]in this case, zerojames[d], we practice "how to "clean up" / merge-in See Also additions into the core of the article" manually enough times to start seeing helpful patterns / guidance that we can agree on amongst ourselves (e.g. here in #indieweb-meta) and then add that rough consensus to /wikify
#[tantek]zerojames[d], note for example that a long "Articles" section is a marginal improvement over a long "See Also" section. So though we don't want to discoruage that, what we really want to encourage is meaningful/thoughtful clustering/incorporation of sets of related See Alsos into their own subsections in a wiki page, typically in Criticism subsections
#petermolnarmany of those articles, especially under Facebook, combine multiple topics, so putting them under a single part of Criticism doesn't always make sense