Jeremy Ruston wrote: > > Is there are any community software that doesn't have the problem that > it's hard to catch up with a large volume of posts? >
I agree but in our case the posts here, partially also serve as the repository for (links to) plugins and other solutions. We kind of mix meta with data. That is probably not the case in most other software communities. > I believe the answer is that we need humans to curate, summarise and index > the useful information that surfaces. I don't see any evidence that that is > particularly easy to automate; it takes human commitment and skill to do > it. > Agreed - BUT, like we learnt from Wikipedia, with the right infrastructure it is possible to collectively, and over time, create something huge. This would be absolutely impossible to create as an individual. Dave's and Mohammad's fantastic sites are fragile in the sense that they totally rely on single individuals and the information automatically decays over time. So far, over the past 15 years, ALL such individual and heart felt attempts have failed. IMO the only way out is to automate as much as possible and provide an infrastructure where anyone can chip in just a little pin to the ant stack at a time. A federated structure with redundancy would give added protection (lesson from TiddlySpace). It might fail, but Wikipedia didn't and for a *lasting *solution I just don't see ANY other believable alternative. <:-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/d140b904-cab9-4a2a-b57b-12156a08e521%40googlegroups.com.
