We're talking about small bookmarks. It doesn't have to be triple-vetted (it's all going to be vetted 2x -- once for the submission and 2nd when it gets merged). Mediocre ideas and sensational ideas might live hand-in-hand in harmony. The thing is, they wouldn't be lost.
-- Mark On Tuesday, March 13, 2018 at 7:00:14 AM UTC-7, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: > > +1 > > I think that would be a good step. The issues arise in how to "metadata > it" & whether it should go through "peer approval." My sense is that its > "yet more work." I mean, WHO is gonna organise this? > > One thing I thought about was posting links to such "special posts" to > Twitter. I've largely held off because I don't feel (1) I have enough > competence to judge what is best; (2) not enough hours in the day as one > person to get it "rightly thorough". The upside would be that I could Tweet > just those links from a TW and then publish that TW as a resource, properly > tagged. I'd be perfectly happy to do that as a "holding area" for something > that could then also get more seriously considered. But I could not > reliably do the decision part of what to include alone. > > Best wishes > Josiah > > Mark S. wrote: >> >> The complaint has been made frequently that good stuff posted in this >> forum gets lost. <snip> >> >> How about we have a Bookmark section consisting primarily of a succinct >> title, a brief description, and a link to interesting threads in this >> forum? Ok, it could be to other discussions too, such as on reddit. >> > -- 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/48f1aa11-777c-47e6-85e2-d8bcc795f2fd%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
