yes. search. the way most people navigate the web. and what i do for a living. oops. you're right. both is a good way to go, i guess... :)
On 22-Oct-09, at 1:20 PM, David King wrote: > It's just a slightly easier way to keep track of things that > happened that > year. So if there are 3-4 years of navlopomo, and you search for > that tag, > you get everything. But if you search for navlopomo09, you would > just find > the stuff happening in 2009 (assuming eeryone used the tag). > > I'm ambivalent - heck, use BOTH tags, and you're covered both ways! > > David Lee King > davidleeking.com - blog > davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog > twitter | skype: davidleeking > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Rupert Howe <rup...@twittervlog.tv> > wrote: > > > I'm confused about the whole adding-the-year-onto-everything thing. > > my twitter stream is full of weird conference abbreviations with > 09 at > > the end. > > seems to me that the things being tagged in Navlopomo will have > their > > own dates anyway - whether videos or blog posts. > > and it's already a long word. > > can we not just do navlopomo as the tag and #navlopomo as the > hashtag? > > am i missing a scenario in which the 09 is vital, or is it a case of > > it conforming with good tag standards...? > > > > On 22-Oct-09, at 2:03 AM, David King wrote: > > > > > Navlopomo09 > > > > > > David Lee King > > > davidleeking.com - blog > > > davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog > > > twitter | skype: davidleeking > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Jay dedman <jay.ded...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > which tag are we going to use? > > > > > > > > Navlopomo > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
