Ciao Ricard basically anyone who can make on okay result from the stubborn reality here would get my vote. x
J. On Wednesday, 22 June 2016 22:59:35 UTC+2, RichardWilliamSmith wrote: > > Is it possible to get an archive from the groups - so that we could > explore ways to take it somewhere more searchable? I did a quick google and > I think the admins might be able to get one - @jermolene do you see > something like that? If you make me an admin for a week, I'll have a play > to see if I can do it and extract what I can. Otherwise there are a few > scrapers specifically for GGroups that I can try. > > Regards, > Richard > > On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 3:02:44 AM UTC+10, Josiah wrote: >> >> Ciao DFR >> >> on "search for older posts" I agree for techies. >> >> i completely disagree for anyone else. >> >> j >> >> On Wednesday, 22 June 2016 18:25:43 UTC+2, Duarte Farrajota Ramos wrote: >>> >>> Nothing happened because I don't think there's any intention of moving. >>> It's also probably a good sign that the current tool serves the community >>> well enough. >>> I don't think any information has been lost, you can easily use search >>> to find all older posts. >>> >>> On Wednesday, 22 June 2016 17:19:50 UTC+1, Josiah wrote: >>>> >>>> Ciao Duarte Farrajota Ramos >>>> >>>> Transfer is painful. You lose people. BUT I dunno. What I SEE is >>>> ongoing loss of CUMULATION. I know its been said before. But NOTHING >>>> happened. Even here there are tagging tools, not used. >>>> >>>> J. >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, 22 June 2016 17:17:42 UTC+2, Duarte Farrajota Ramos wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think this has been brought up many times before and TiddlyWiki >>>>> Google groups is not going away anytime soon. >>>>> >>>>> I started using Stack Exchange network of sites recently though (more >>>>> specifically Blender.Stackexchange) and I've been loving the format and >>>>> the >>>>> way it works. >>>>> I wonder if it would be adequate for TiddlyWiki, but from my >>>>> experience everything indicates that it could work quite well. >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, 22 June 2016 12:37:32 UTC+1, Josiah wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Ciao all >>>>>> >>>>>> After much sweat and endless toying I figured out how to look back >>>>>> over posts here in a way i could finally find relevant stuff. Sometimes >>>>>> they are gold. Often mush unless you have the time to wade through >>>>>> entire >>>>>> threads. >>>>>> >>>>>> What DOES stand out is that with ... >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. decent tagging of OPTIMAL answers >>>>>> 2. more cross-linking to relevant resources >>>>>> 3. a bit more thought by (informed) contributors that discussions >>>>>> could really helpfully add to documentation, possibly create it ... >>>>>> >>>>>> ... in short, it could solve a lot of the "documentation gap". As is >>>>>> I see perpetual re-creation of the wheel. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The IRONY is this group has to be one of the most user-friendly on >>>>>> the planet that's losing its history daily. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not NOT convinced that the way Google Groups work is optimal for >>>>>> what is needed. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Best wishes >>>>>> >>>>>> Josiah >>>>>> >>>>> -- 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b2eb045b-97f2-4d11-b99f-0611299c17cf%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
