By the way this is one of the only ways to try and answer a few of the OT questions.
On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 1:07:16 PM UTC+10, TW Tones wrote: > > TT, > > What does Opt In mean to you? Surely that is enough to calm you down? > > Any resource on the internet, a website, a link and mail out already may > use a way to see how many visitors they have. > > Sure there are multi-site traps fed by advertising add on's the world > over, but I am not talking about this. > > In fact we can already use standard analytics to see the ip address, > unique visitors etc... on any tiddlywiki we host on the internet, and it > can be done without your knowledge, but you should assume its being done. > > On top of this I am suggesting a community method to opt into a simple "I > have being loaded" analytic. We are designers, we can force Opt in, we can > permit user opt out we can do anything. So if we want we should fill a gap, > provide a service that meets with our community values. By providing this > service we reduce the likely hood of others being developed in a vacuum, > without community standards applied. > > We can also advertise how to conceal your details via secure proxies > etc... if you want anonymity. > > Regards > Tony > > > > > > > On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 12:06:34 PM UTC+10, TiddlyTweeter wrote: >> >> Ciao Tones >> >> I don't wanna get hysterical or entirely lose the OP here. >> >> I agree with you that like minded who want to connect should do it in >> easiest way. >> Just don't put anything in MY architecture that let's you sniff me. >> >> You see my point? >> >> In calls for easier co-working there is an implicit assumption. >> In fact most of the net is seriously infected with it. >> That the "reception" plug socket is open. >> I don't want any such socket. >> >> Your idea of a "vote up" mechanism is an example of the "slippery slope" >> I think. >> Looks innocent. Bad idea to let anything like that near core. Plugin, of >> course is okay. >> >> But the distinction between voluntarism and hard code is not as sharp as >> you might think. >> And even thoughts in this direction (information to "the" community) >> worry me as they are seductively, dangerously loose. >> >> Now I sound like a paranoid twat :-) But there is substance in my >> thoughts on this. >> >> Back to the OP. The poster was interested in "types" of people who use TW >> and "types" we trying to reach. >> Its kinda odd actually. To the First, you & me :-), to the Second no >> idea/anyone/don't care. >> But right in this spot you may feel differently? >> >> Best wishes >> TT >> >> >> On Thursday, 18 June 2020 03:01:19 UTC+2, TW Tones wrote: >>> >>> TT, >>> >>> The point is a wiki should allow Opt-in to provide information to the >>> community. >>> >>> I would not only be happy, but would like such a services to go on my >>> Gihub page, the playground and blog wikis I have published. >>> >>> I expect more people to publish content for public or community view >>> would like this as well, >>> Its a feature rather than a threat. >>> Provide informed consent options for both designer and visitor there >>> remains no contention in my view. >>> >>> Perhaps add the ability for them to vote it up in socials etc... >>> >>> Regards >>> Tony >>> >>> On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 10:22:18 AM UTC+10, TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>>> >>>> Tones >>>> >>>> As far as I understand it there is total antipathy to any kind of >>>> collective tracking for TW built in. I think that is good. >>>> >>>> One simple thing might be a meta tag announcing "This is a TW" in the >>>> header a trawler might recognise. I see no harm in that. So long as you >>>> can delete it. >>>> >>>> I am totally opposed to anything that "polls" or "sniffs" around. >>>> >>>> TT >>>> >>>> On Thursday, 18 June 2020 02:07:51 UTC+2, TW Tones wrote: >>>>> >>>>> TT, OGNSYA >>>>> >>>>> Re tracking, I have felt for sometime, if the core included an opt in >>>>> to tickle a URL somewhere so that we could get an indication of >>>>> implementations on the internet and their visitation possibly quite a few >>>>> in the community would opt in. If this allowed opt in to a league table >>>>> of >>>>> popular wikis people may be happy to have their wiki rise and become more >>>>> visible. >>>>> >>>>> Then we could start to answer the above questions. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> TW Tone's aka TonyM >>>>> >>>>> On Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 9:42:38 AM UTC+10, TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On big numbers. A very useful thing to know. Your questions are Good. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some time ago I tried pin it down. The issue is that TW release has >>>>>> NO tracking on by default. There is no way to collect reliable data >>>>>> directly of any kind. >>>>>> >>>>>> Proxy measures (user groups, common hosting services) are possible >>>>>> but will only tell you there are more Japanese users than you might >>>>>> realise, that users from German speaking countries are High and that >>>>>> English Speaking users are more up north than in the Antipodes. >>>>>> >>>>>> The more detailed (good) questions you ask are I think for an >>>>>> interesting research project. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Best wishes >>>>>> TT >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, 17 June 2020 18:44:03 UTC+2, OGNSYA wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm curious to know what type of people uses TiddlyWiki currently, >>>>>>> and what type of people the project wants to reach? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I believe that discussing this might help inform many of the >>>>>>> conversations that have been going on, such as the Getting Started >>>>>>> page, >>>>>>> and the UI/workflow redesign. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In case this is not known, here are a few possible guide questions >>>>>>> to help estimate: >>>>>>> (I included an initial answer in all of them, just as a starting >>>>>>> point): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - *What type of people uses TW?* >>>>>>> (49% coders, 49% casual coders, 2% non-coders?) >>>>>>> - *How do they use TW?* (compared to TW's full potential) >>>>>>> (50% very basic usage, 30% uses several features/plugins, 15% >>>>>>> hack/develop plugins, 5% experts?) >>>>>>> - *What proportion of internet users use TW on a frequent basis?* >>>>>>> (2-5%?) >>>>>>> - *How many internet users are coders? *(in general, regardless >>>>>>> of TW) >>>>>>> - Non-coders (98.5%?) >>>>>>> - Casual coders (0.5%?) >>>>>>> - Coders (1%?) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is intentionally very simplified, especially because most of >>>>>>> these questions can't be answered objectively. Regardless, knowing the >>>>>>> community's perception of them is already very useful. This is meant to >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> a first draft. Please feel free to correct/suggest changes. (For the >>>>>>> guesses, I partly used some data found online. ) >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- 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/00c6a4e9-8e61-400b-9bd7-29982a46db3do%40googlegroups.com.
