LOL, never mind. The Supreme Court killed the COPA law Wednesday. YAY! My only worry was protecting the journaling sites, and individual journal owners, from harassment. Though it may not have sounded that way, sorry if I didn't make myself clear enough :/
doingsoso ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 6:00 AM Subject: dw-discuss Digest, Vol 7, Issue 25 > Send dw-discuss mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of dw-discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Semagic and LJ-Sec (Sophie) > 2. Re: dw-discuss Digest, Vol 7, Issue 23 (katja) > 3. Re: Semagic and LJ-Sec (Mark Smith) > 4. Re: Profile request (Emily Ravenwood) > 5. Re: Profile request (Silicon Shaman) > 6. Re: Profile request (Emily Ravenwood) > 7. Re: Profile request (Lee Ann Rucker) > 8. Re: Profile request (Janine Costanzo) > 9. Re: Semagic and LJ-Sec (Ruth - thewhiteowl) > 10. Re: Semagic and LJ-Sec (Lassarina Aoibhell) > 11. Re: Semagic and LJ-Sec (Mark Smith) > 12. Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc (Highlander II) > 13. Re: Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc (Joshua Kronengold) > 14. Re: Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc (Emily Ravenwood) > 15. Re: Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc (Mark Smith) > 16. Re: Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc (Denise Paolucci) > 17. Re: Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc (Joshua Kronengold) > 18. Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, Groups. Reading > Lists - etc) ([email protected]) > 19. Re: Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, Groups. Reading > Lists - etc) (Joshua Kronengold) > 20. Re: Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, Groups. Reading > Lists - etc) ([email protected]) > 21. Re: Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, Groups. Reading > Lists - etc) (Azure Lunatic) > 22. Re: Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, Groups. Reading > Lists - etc) ([email protected]) > 23. Re: Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, Groups. Reading > Lists - etc) (Highlander II) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:16:10 +0000 > From: Sophie <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Semagic and LJ-Sec > To: Mark Smith <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Bear in mind that most, if not all, clients send the optional 'login' > command which sends back a whole load of different data unrelated to > each other, including the friends list. So you'd either need to not > send that list, send just one of the lists, or do something else - so > it affects more than just friends-related commands, unfortunately. > > - Sophie. > > On 1/21/09, Mark Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I've been working on a bit of a client - if you're changing the XML-RPC >> > APIs then please document it somewhere so I can have a play! >> >> >> There will not be major changes in the posting interface or in >> retrieving entries, comments, etc. The only real changes we'll make >> at this point are to the friend/friendgroup management protocols. >> >> For the most part, they will just be getting a facelift: rename, >> change the arguments and outputs. Should be pretty straightforward. >> >> >> >> -- >> Mark Smith / xb95 >> [email protected] >> _______________________________________________ >> >> dw-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss >> >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:46:00 -0600 > From: katja <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] dw-discuss Digest, Vol 7, Issue 23 > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > "I don't know too much about programming but can the system be made to > automatically tag the person as adult, by the birth date they use when > they > sign up? And then add a blurb in the user info/bio that " user name" is > an > adult, of legal age or over 18, over 21 or something like that without > having to reveal the user's entire BD?" > > I'm thinking of something like the stamps/colours of different age badges > at > conventions might be helpful. What the age ranges would be would be > another > conversation, but even just having a little icon next to the username on > their profile that's a different colour or picture might be handy. Then, > it's fairly overlookable, but if you are a mod looking for proof of age, > that'd be there. It could be automatically generated from the given date > of > birth from signup. > > As for what to do with Personas/sockpuppets, maybe have a line that > so-and-so is a "spoke" from the hub account X, and then next to the hub > account name, have that same age indication icon. That would depend more > on > how hubs and spokes end up handled. > > Another bit may be to have the age icon link to an FAQ about the icons, > with > what the colours indicated. (The icons could even have a small <18/>=18 on > them.) > > I just don't want every user to go about with this tag hanging off them > about their age. That's fine for a weekend, but is an awkward way to > conduct > life, and one of the joys and sorrows of the internet is that, if you are > a > mature 12 year old, people will treat you as a mature person. We've seen > the > problems that this causes, but it is one of the perks as well. > > katja > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/pipermail/dw-discuss/attachments/20090122/61dcfc31/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:08:43 -0800 > From: Mark Smith <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Semagic and LJ-Sec > To: Sophie <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > >> Bear in mind that most, if not all, clients send the optional 'login' >> command which sends back a whole load of different data unrelated to >> each other, including the friends list. So you'd either need to not >> send that list, send just one of the lists, or do something else - so >> it affects more than just friends-related commands, unfortunately. > > My plan is to make login not do that. > > I'm quite sure that if you don't send any friends back, the clients > will assume you don't have any. So hopefully that will alleviate > this. > > > -- > Mark Smith / xb95 > [email protected] > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:18:16 -0500 > From: Emily Ravenwood <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Profile request > To: katja <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:46 AM, katja wrote: > >> I'm thinking of something like the stamps/colours of different age >> badges at conventions might be helpful. What the age ranges would >> be would be another conversation, but even just having a little >> icon next to the username on their profile that's a different >> colour or picture might be handy. Then, it's fairly overlookable, >> but if you are a mod looking for proof of age, that'd be there. It >> could be automatically generated from the given date of birth from >> signup. > > I think any automation of such a function would be a mistake. There > is a solid subset of users who object to any publication of their > personal info at all, witness the objections to the new profile > because it puts the posting stats up at the top instead of at the > bottom under a link to full view. I can only imagine the shrieks of > outrage at something like age badges. Any function that addresses > this issue has to balance in some useful manner between one user's > privacy and the other user's desire to restrict their content based > on age, both of which seem to me equally valid and significant. > > Consider too that young users and/or their parents may want > specifically to *conceal* age to prevent the child being targeted by > predators. This should, I think, be thrown into that balance also. > > It would be more difficult to program, but the approach that seems to > me to make more sense for privacy and utility both would be to give > community or journal owners the *option* of age-limiting their > members/trusted list and have that work entirely in the background > based on the age they set as the lower limit and the age a user > entered at journal creation. It would probably want a manual override > available in case the mod/owner chose to make individual exceptions. > > Obviously, if this were attempted, it would be something for the > "some time in the future" list. > > Cheers, > ER > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:39:21 +0000 > From: Silicon Shaman <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Profile request > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I might be over-simplifying the problem, but wouldn't it be far easier to > code and/or address people concerns if it was mandatory to enter a full > birth-date including year... but then one had tick boxes to indicate if > one > wished to *display* or not the day/month/year of your birthday on your > profile page. [so that the user could decide on their combo] > > The system itself could retain a value for birthdate and calculate under > or > over values such as 13/16/18 as a flag, which would not be transparent to > the users, but would be used to set threshold values for restricted > access, > as set by community moderators and/or journal owners. > > But like I said.. maybe I'm off-beam. > -- > Silicon.shaman > Cogito ergo periculosus. > [ I think, therefore I'm dangerous ]. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/pipermail/dw-discuss/attachments/20090122/e44ef705/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:47:52 -0500 > From: Emily Ravenwood <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Profile request > To: Silicon Shaman <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > I think we're thinking of more or less the same back-end > functionality, yes. > > As for display... the profile does that already, and the options > include at least day/month, year and day/month/year, so I think > that's already addressed for people who want to go ahead and display > their info. > > Cheers, > ER > > On Jan 22, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Silicon Shaman wrote: > >> I might be over-simplifying the problem, but wouldn't it be far >> easier to code and/or address people concerns if it was mandatory >> to enter a full birth-date including year... but then one had tick >> boxes to indicate if one wished to *display* or not the day/month/ >> year of your birthday on your profile page. [so that the user could >> decide on their combo] >> >> The system itself could retain a value for birthdate and calculate >> under or over values such as 13/16/18 as a flag, which would not >> be transparent to the users, but would be used to set threshold >> values for restricted access, as set by community moderators and/or >> journal owners. >> >> But like I said.. maybe I'm off-beam. >> -- >> Silicon.shaman >> Cogito ergo periculosus. >> [ I think, therefore I'm dangerous ]. >> _______________________________________________ >> dw-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:49:19 -0800 > From: Lee Ann Rucker <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Profile request > To: Silicon Shaman <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > It already does work that way. It asks for your real birthdate on > journal creation, which is what I enter for my RPG journals, and then > I immediately change it to the character's birthdate. And then there's > an option to control how much is shown - all, nothing, hide year. > > Ideally it would keep the original date for any legal-age > restrictions, but use the changed date for display. > > On Jan 22, 2009, at 9:39 AM, Silicon Shaman wrote: > >> I might be over-simplifying the problem, but wouldn't it be far >> easier to code and/or address people concerns if it was mandatory to >> enter a full birth-date including year... but then one had tick >> boxes to indicate if one wished to *display* or not the day/month/ >> year of your birthday on your profile page. [so that the user could >> decide on their combo] >> >> The system itself could retain a value for birthdate and calculate >> under or over values such as 13/16/18 as a flag, which would not be >> transparent to the users, but would be used to set threshold values >> for restricted access, as set by community moderators and/or journal >> owners. >> >> But like I said.. maybe I'm off-beam. >> -- >> Silicon.shaman >> Cogito ergo periculosus. >> [ I think, therefore I'm dangerous ]. >> _______________________________________________ >> dw-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:02:51 -0800 > From: Janine Costanzo <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Profile request > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Keep in mind that the code already makes it so if a community sets > itself as "adult only", no one who signed up with an account with a > birthdate that makes them under 18 can join. So honestly, I think the > problems mentioned are addressed already, as long as the community who > wants to keep its members under 18 marks itself as adult only. > > Janine > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Lee Ann Rucker <[email protected]> wrote: >> It already does work that way. It asks for your real birthdate on >> journal creation, which is what I enter for my RPG journals, and then >> I immediately change it to the character's birthdate. And then there's >> an option to control how much is shown - all, nothing, hide year. >> >> Ideally it would keep the original date for any legal-age >> restrictions, but use the changed date for display. >> >> On Jan 22, 2009, at 9:39 AM, Silicon Shaman wrote: >> >>> I might be over-simplifying the problem, but wouldn't it be far >>> easier to code and/or address people concerns if it was mandatory to >>> enter a full birth-date including year... but then one had tick >>> boxes to indicate if one wished to *display* or not the day/month/ >>> year of your birthday on your profile page. [so that the user could >>> decide on their combo] >>> >>> The system itself could retain a value for birthdate and calculate >>> under or over values such as 13/16/18 as a flag, which would not be >>> transparent to the users, but would be used to set threshold values >>> for restricted access, as set by community moderators and/or journal >>> owners. >>> >>> But like I said.. maybe I'm off-beam. >>> -- >>> Silicon.shaman >>> Cogito ergo periculosus. >>> [ I think, therefore I'm dangerous ]. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dw-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dw-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:37:06 +0000 > From: Ruth - thewhiteowl <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Semagic and LJ-Sec > To: Mark Smith <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Mark Smith wrote: >>> Bear in mind that most, if not all, clients send the optional 'login' >>> command which sends back a whole load of different data unrelated to >>> each other, including the friends list. So you'd either need to not >>> send that list, send just one of the lists, or do something else - so >>> it affects more than just friends-related commands, unfortunately. >>> >> >> My plan is to make login not do that. >> >> I'm quite sure that if you don't send any friends back, the clients >> will assume you don't have any. So hopefully that will alleviate >> this. >> >> >> > Oh, that's rather nice :) One of those deceptively simple solutions. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:51:27 -0600 > From: Lassarina Aoibhell <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Semagic and LJ-Sec > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > If the client does not acknowledge our friends, will we still be able to > do > custom security filters, or will we have to post something as private and > then go into the web interface to update the filter? Or will custom > security filters no longer be allowed? (Apologies if I missed this > somewhere.) As much as I love all my friends, sometimes there are things > I > want to talk about that I wouldn't share with everyone :) > > Lassarina Aoibhell > Webmaster, The RPG Place > http://www.rpgplace.net > > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Ruth - thewhiteowl > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Mark Smith wrote: >> >> Bear in mind that most, if not all, clients send the optional 'login' >> >> command which sends back a whole load of different data unrelated to >> >> each other, including the friends list. So you'd either need to not >> >> send that list, send just one of the lists, or do something else - so >> >> it affects more than just friends-related commands, unfortunately. >> >> >> > >> > My plan is to make login not do that. >> > >> > I'm quite sure that if you don't send any friends back, the clients >> > will assume you don't have any. So hopefully that will alleviate >> > this. >> > >> > >> > >> Oh, that's rather nice :) One of those deceptively simple solutions. >> _______________________________________________ >> dw-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/pipermail/dw-discuss/attachments/20090122/58bd64d3/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:53:04 -0800 > From: Mark Smith <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Semagic and LJ-Sec > To: Lassarina Aoibhell <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > >> If the client does not acknowledge our friends, will we still be able to >> do >> custom security filters, or will we have to post something as private and >> then go into the web interface to update the filter? Or will custom >> security filters no longer be allowed? (Apologies if I missed this >> somewhere.) As much as I love all my friends, sometimes there are things >> I >> want to talk about that I wouldn't share with everyone :) > > Friends are different from groups. > > I will make sure that the clients are able to support groups still, at > least, posting to them. You will still be able to post to custom > trust groups. > > > -- > Mark Smith / xb95 > [email protected] > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:46:06 -0500 > From: Highlander II <[email protected]> > Subject: [DW Discuss] Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc > To: dw-discuss <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > This sort of stems from the previous discussion, but is more geared toward > using the web interface and how different people use filter and group > features. > > Maybe it's just the way I use the feature, but I use filters on my various > journals for breaking up my friends' list reading page into different > 'pieces', so to speak. (I find this especially useful for RPGs with > multiple comms.) > > Using the RPG example: For one character, I may have that one in 3 diff > games, so I have 6 sets of filters - 1 for each game comm and 1 for each > OOC > comm for those games, that way I can click the filter and read the posts > for > a subset of all the comms on that journal's f'list. > > Using my personal LJ: I have stuff I read almost daily in one filter (the > default), then other comms that I'm part of, but don't look at every day > (for any number of reasons: almost no posts, posts 300 times a day, NSFW, > whatever), but I also have groups on that filter list that are actually > FILTERS, as in 'these subject-related posts go to sub-set A of f'list, but > these others go to sub-set B'. > > Sort of a combination 'organizational tool' and 'filter list'. I'd like > to > have a way to keep the two separate, though it's not imperative for my use > of the service. > > Of course, I could be the only one who uses filters this way, but I > thought > I'd toss it out there, in case I'm not. =) > > > -- > Highlander II > > Currently reading: "Furies of Calderon" by Jim Butcher > http://www.h2smsk.com > http://hdresdenwizard.h2smsk.com > http://vanhelsing.h2smsk.com/ > http://jamesmarsters.h2smsk.com > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/pipermail/dw-discuss/attachments/20090122/0dd5e758/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:08:50 -0600 > From: Joshua Kronengold <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Highlander II writes: >>Sort of a combination 'organizational tool' and 'filter list'. I'd like >>to >>have a way to keep the two separate, though it's not imperative for my use >>of the service. >> >>Of course, I could be the only one who uses filters this way, but I >>thought >>I'd toss it out there, in case I'm not. =) > > You're not the only one (except that since I don't post a lot of > private stuff, I don't use post filters; I would if it were useful). > > Anyways, since "people I watch" are an entirely different list in W/T/F > than "people I trust", I'd expect that "trust filters" are very > different (or will eventually be) than "read filters". > > > -- > Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ > ,) > --^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;' > /\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\ > /-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--' (_/-' > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:20:21 -0500 > From: Emily Ravenwood <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc > To: Joshua Kronengold <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > Actually, I don't think I've seen this particular interface question > answered yet. In LJ, there's only one Friends list, so there's only > one window to draw people from to populate filters, and it's entirely > up to the user to decide whether to use that as a reading filter or a > trust filter. Has it been decided yet what it's going to look like > on DW? > > Once the flist is split, will there be two different populate-from > windows in the Custom Groups dialogue, one of the Trust list and one > of the Watch list? Or will both still be dumped into a single > window? Or will it just be the Trust list that can be filtered? I > know I, too, would still want to be able to filter my Watch list into > reading groups, so that last would be a definite reduction in > utility, and the second would seem to run against the whole purpose > of splitting the list. Can we hope for door number one? > > Cheers, > ER > > On Jan 22, 2009, at 5:08 PM, Joshua Kronengold wrote: > >> Highlander II writes: >>> Sort of a combination 'organizational tool' and 'filter list'. >>> I'd like to >>> have a way to keep the two separate, though it's not imperative >>> for my use >>> of the service. >>> >>> Of course, I could be the only one who uses filters this way, but >>> I thought >>> I'd toss it out there, in case I'm not. =) >> >> You're not the only one (except that since I don't post a lot of >> private stuff, I don't use post filters; I would if it were useful). >> >> Anyways, since "people I watch" are an entirely different list in W/ >> T/F >> than "people I trust", I'd expect that "trust filters" are very >> different (or will eventually be) than "read filters". >> >> >> -- >> Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ >> _,,,--,,_ ,) >> --^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' >> -, ;-;;' >> /\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |, >> 4- ) )-,_ ) /\ >> /-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--' (_/-' >> _______________________________________________ >> dw-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:25:53 -0800 > From: Mark Smith <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc > To: Emily Ravenwood <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > >> Actually, I don't think I've seen this particular interface question >> answered yet. In LJ, there's only one Friends list, so there's only >> one window to draw people from to populate filters, and it's entirely >> up to the user to decide whether to use that as a reading filter or a >> trust filter. Has it been decided yet what it's going to look like >> on DW? > > The tentative plan at this point - it's unimplemented as yet - is to > have Trust Groups and Reading Groups. You can define a Trust Group > with people you Trust for Posting. You can define a Reading Group > with people you Watch for Reading. > > I proposed collapsing them to one entity (which gives the ability for > you to let people on your watch list into a certain trust filter) but > that was rapidly shot down with some sort of "and whatever you do, > don't cross the streams" reference, followed up by flaming marshmallow > goo. (Mmm.) > > > -- > Mark Smith / xb95 > [email protected] > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:30:13 -0500 > From: Denise Paolucci <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc > To: Emily Ravenwood <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > > On Jan 22, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Emily Ravenwood wrote: > >> Actually, I don't think I've seen this particular interface question >> answered yet. In LJ, there's only one Friends list, so there's only >> one window to draw people from to populate filters, and it's entirely >> up to the user to decide whether to use that as a reading filter or a >> trust filter. Has it been decided yet what it's going to look like >> on DW? >> >> Once the flist is split, will there be two different populate-from >> windows in the Custom Groups dialogue, one of the Trust list and one >> of the Watch list? Or will both still be dumped into a single >> window? Or will it just be the Trust list that can be filtered? I >> know I, too, would still want to be able to filter my Watch list into >> reading groups, so that last would be a definite reduction in >> utility, and the second would seem to run against the whole purpose >> of splitting the list. Can we hope for door number one? > > > Yes, both the reading list and the trust list can be made into custom > groups. > > --D > > > -- > Denise Paolucci > [email protected] > Dreamwidth Studios: Open Source, open expression, open operations. > Coming soon! > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:37:39 -0600 > From: Joshua Kronengold <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Filters, Groups. Reading Lists - etc > To: Mark Smith <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > >>The tentative plan at this point - it's unimplemented as yet - is to >>have Trust Groups and Reading Groups. You can define a Trust Group >>with people you Trust for Posting. You can define a Reading Group >>with people you Watch for Reading. > > *nod* > > As I mentioned in an earlier thread (and DGlenn responded to), I think > splitting them like this allows for some changes based on the ways the > functionality is simply different -- while there's limited utility in > letting you select, say, a list of tags rather than an entire journal > for a filter that will as likely be used for trust as for reading, if > you -know- it's a watchlist, having more specific options for what > part of the journal to read makes a lot of sense. > > -- > Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ > ,) > --^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;' > /\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\ > /-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--' (_/-' > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 18 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:08:33 -0500 > From: [email protected] > Subject: [DW Discuss] Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, Groups. > Reading Lists - etc) > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > > >> Highlander II writes: >> >Sort of a combination 'organizational tool' and 'filter list'. I'd like >> >to >> >have a way to keep the two separate, though it's not imperative for my >> >use >> >of the service. >> > >> >Of course, I could be the only one who uses filters this way, but I >> >thought >> >I'd toss it out there, in case I'm not. =) >> >> You're not the only one > > Me, three. Which brings up a feature request which I submitted to > Support, so presumably the people combing Support for good ideas will > find it, but I figure I'd plug it here. > > It would be really cool if sets of filters could be user-defined such > that membership of a trusted/watched user was required of > one-and-only-one filter. This could be done entirely at the interface > layer for managing groups and adding/modifying friends > (watchees/trustees), and be implemented by a convention that uses a > prefix and a dot to group filters. > > Example and use case: > > Let's say I have four "read" ("watch"?) filters, called north, south, > east and west. Also, I have a bunch of "access" ("trust"?) filters, > and they all have names, too, like "bob's birthday", "nudes", and > "knitting". > > In my fantasy, I could rename just my read/watch filters: > foo.north > foo.south > foo.east > foo.west > > The rest of the names stay the same and those filters are unaffected. > > And from then on: > > 1) if I try to add a new watchee without assigning him to one of those > four filters, DW throws an error, "You haven't assigned Soandso to any > 'foo' filter. Please pick a 'foo' filter for this user." This makes > it impossible for me to forget to add him to at least one reading > filter. ("Huh, I added him months ago, and he's never posted since. > Wonder what's with that?") > > 2) if I try to remove Soandso from a read filters without previously > adding him to another, either I get a similar error ("You don't have > Soandso assigned to any 'foo' filters. Please add him to a 'foo' > filter.") or I simply get a persistent error message at the top of the > manage groups page, "Soandso is a 'foo' orphan! Soandso does not > appear on any 'foo' filter. Please add Soandso to the appropriate > 'foo' filter.") This makes it either impossible or just much harder > to accidentally orphan a subscription (which right now is a trivial > misclick error to make, yea, I am the voice of experience.) > > Also, then the interface maybe could be smartened, such that if you > define such excluvise groupings, the interface can present you with a > list of users and their exclusive group as pulldown menus, making it > much faster and easier (and, I think, 508 compliant/non-AJAxy) to > shift members around between exclusive filters. > > Meanwhile, all filters without a dot (or whatever separator) continue > to work normally, thus making it completely invisible to anyone who > doesn't want to use this feature (so long as they don't use the > separator character in their filter names). > > -- Siderea > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 19 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:28:15 -0600 > From: Joshua Kronengold <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, > Groups. Reading Lists - etc) > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > [email protected] writes: >>Me, three. Which brings up a feature request which I submitted to >>Support, so presumably the people combing Support for good ideas will >>find it, but I figure I'd plug it here. > >>It would be really cool if sets of filters could be user-defined such >>that membership of a trusted/watched user was required of >>one-and-only-one filter. This could be done entirely at the interface >>layer for managing groups and adding/modifying friends >>(watchees/trustees), and be implemented by a convention that uses a >>prefix and a dot to group filters. > > I don't like it, but I think you're trying to solve the same problem I > want to solve with a different, never quite articulated feature req: > > You should be able to specify watchlists, and trust lists, as > combinations of other filters or watchlists (depending). As it is, > people can fall "through the cracks" as you forget to assign them to > any cateogry and then don't see their posts (or vice versa) for months > or years before you get things straightened out. But...to take my > model: > > Root-level Watchlists: > Close Friends > Loud Friends > Comics > > Actual desired readlists: > 1 Comics # this I'll always read > 2 CLose Friends # catchup list > 3 Loud Friends # timekiller > 4 all-(Loud Friends+Comics) # normal non-comics read-list > 5 all-(Loud Friends+Comics+Close Friends) > # for when I've caught up, and want to skim the non-loud, non-close > # friend posts I missed. > > As it is, to get #4, which is my -normal- readlist, I need to maintain > a separate "non-comics" filter that has all my close friends -plus- > anyone I want to normally read. And sometimes I make mistakes and > someone isn't on that filter and I don't read them and wonder why. > > Moreover, to get #5, I'd have to do even more work, and maintain a > "non-comics - close friends" filter. I don't, making fill-in reading > after a catchup far more of a chore. > > But if filters could be expressed in terms of other filters, I'd only > have to maintain the root lists -- people I never want to miss a post > from, feeds, and people I usually don't want to read but sometimes > might, and be sure that anyone I didn't -expressly- put in those > filters could be gotten with inversion. > > -- > Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ > ,) > --^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;' > /\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\ > /-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--' (_/-' > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 20 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:04:37 -0500 > From: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, > Groups. Reading Lists - etc) > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > > >> [email protected] writes: >> >Me, three. Which brings up a feature request which I submitted to >> >Support, so presumably the people combing Support for good ideas will >> >find it, but I figure I'd plug it here. >> >> >It would be really cool if sets of filters could be user-defined such >> >that membership of a trusted/watched user was required of >> >one-and-only-one filter. This could be done entirely at the interface >> >layer for managing groups and adding/modifying friends >> >(watchees/trustees), and be implemented by a convention that uses a >> >prefix and a dot to group filters. >> >> I don't like it, but I think you're trying to solve the same problem I >> want to solve with a different, never quite articulated feature req: > > I want to solve a simpler problem than yours. Yours is more flexible, > but as with so many technologies it gets that flexibility at the > expense of simplicity. Myself, I don't particularly want to > mix-and-match filters on the fly, I want pre-sets like on a radio > dial. "All people not in these other filters" is useful to me only to > manually check to make sure I haven't orphaned someone, and I'd rather > the system take the initiative for validating my input instead of > making me check. > > Do you realize in your example, you have an implicit additional > Root-level Watchlist, which turns it almost (but not quite) into my > example? Factoring this in an exclusive system like I proposed: > >> Root-level Watchlists: >> Close Friends >> Loud Friends >> Comics >> >> Actual desired readlists: >> 1 Comics # this I'll always read >> 2 CLose Friends # catchup list >> 3 Loud Friends # timekiller >> 4 all-(Loud Friends+Comics) # normal non-comics read-list >> 5 all-(Loud Friends+Comics+Close Friends) >> # for when I've caught up, and want to skim the non-loud, non-close >> # friend posts I missed. > > We get: > Root-level Exclusive Watchlists: > Close Friends > Loud Friends > Comics > Everybody else > > Actual desired readlists: > 1 Comics > 2 Close Friends > 3 Loud Frinds > 4 Close Friends + Everybody Else > 5 Everybody Else > > Which is computationally much easier to achieve, and because it's > managed at the group-management interface it doesn't further thrash > the server on page render. Excepting 4, everything you want you can > get under what I've described, and 4 only requires viewing two > watchlists at once, which I expect would be simpler to implement than > exclusion at the page render. > >> As it is, to get #4, which is my -normal- readlist, I need to maintain >> a separate "non-comics" filter that has all my close friends -plus- >> anyone I want to normally read. And sometimes I make mistakes and >> someone isn't on that filter and I don't read them and wonder why. > > Right, which is why I propose multiple exclusive categories, instead > of all these tedious binary choices. > >> Moreover, to get #5, I'd have to do even more work, and maintain a >> "non-comics - close friends" filter. I don't, making fill-in reading >> after a catchup far more of a chore. > > Oh, right. Add to previous: User can specify group default for friend > add. So when you add a new watchee, you *have* to assign them to one > of Close Friends, Loud Friends, Comic, or Everybody Else -- and if you > don't specify, it defaults to adding them to, say, Everybody Else (or > whichever one you picked as the default for the group). > > -- Siderea > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 21 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:24:44 -0800 > From: Azure Lunatic <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, > Groups. Reading Lists - etc) > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> Right, which is why I propose multiple exclusive categories, instead >> of all these tedious binary choices. >> >>> Moreover, to get #5, I'd have to do even more work, and maintain a >>> "non-comics - close friends" filter. I don't, making fill-in reading >>> after a catchup far more of a chore. >> >> Oh, right. Add to previous: User can specify group default for friend >> add. So when you add a new watchee, you *have* to assign them to one >> of Close Friends, Loud Friends, Comic, or Everybody Else -- and if you >> don't specify, it defaults to adding them to, say, Everybody Else (or >> whichever one you picked as the default for the group). > > Unfortunately, exclusive categories would break some of the > reading-list-filter strategies that I use, so I am really disinclined > to like this suggestion as-is. > > I would dearly love to be able to do Boolean filtering with my custom > groups (at least reading if not trust). > > I would completely support a user interface in which you could > optionally force exclusive categories, and would absolutely love a > user interface that would highlight users that were not in groups on > demand. (A filters management client? Using a client would enable many > fun things that might possibly be too processing-intensive to be > viable server-side, and it's not unheard-of for LJ, see: Semagic.) > > > -Azz > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 22 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:35:32 -0500 > From: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, > Groups. Reading Lists - etc) > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > > >> Unfortunately, exclusive categories would break some of the >> reading-list-filter strategies that I use > > So, did you miss this part: > > : Meanwhile, all filters without a dot (or whatever separator) continue > : to work normally, thus making it completely invisible to anyone who > : doesn't want to use this feature (so long as they don't use the > : separator character in their filter names). > >> I would completely support a user interface in which you could >> optionally force exclusive categories, > > Like, say, the one I just proposed? > >> (A filters management client? Using a client would enable many >> fun things that might possibly be too processing-intensive to be >> viable server-side, and it's not unheard-of for LJ, see: Semagic.) > > Presently just about all filter management is handled through AJAX. > > -- Siderea > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 23 > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:57:06 -0500 > From: Highlander II <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DW Discuss] Exclusive filter sets (was Re: Filters, > Groups. Reading Lists - etc) > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 7:04 PM, > <[email protected]<siderea%[email protected]> >> wrote: > >> >> > [email protected] <siderea%[email protected]> writes: >> >> We get: >> Root-level Exclusive Watchlists: >> Close Friends >> Loud Friends >> Comics >> Everybody else >> >> Actual desired readlists: >> 1 Comics >> 2 Close Friends >> 3 Loud Frinds >> 4 Close Friends + Everybody Else >> 5 Everybody Else >> > > >> -- Siderea > > > > If you have your filter groups set up like the Root Levels listed above, > you > can already do #4 on LJ by checking the two boxes next to 'close friends' > and 'everybody else'. However, if you don't have 'everybody else' as a > specific group, then that won't work. > > > -- > Highlander II > > Currently reading: "Furies of Calderon" by Jim Butcher > http://www.h2smsk.com > http://hdresdenwizard.h2smsk.com > http://vanhelsing.h2smsk.com/ > http://jamesmarsters.h2smsk.com > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/pipermail/dw-discuss/attachments/20090122/db65df41/attachment-0001.htm > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > dw-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss > > End of dw-discuss Digest, Vol 7, Issue 25 > ***************************************** _______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
