gaufde's recent activity
-
Comment on I would really appreciate some help. Looking for moving, thoughtful or observant or interesting songs that aren't metal or rap/hiphop in ~music
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI respect that! I totally understand and stand behind all the reasons and principles behind these beliefs. I just didn’t see the final conclusions as so easily cut and dry, and opening up...I would honestly prefer not to dredge up a bunch of old drama
I respect that!
However, seeing so many suggestions about altering ~lgbt genuinely made me fearful…. And so I don't want to see it altered merely because people are more concerned with perfect taxonomy, or don't understand why having it as a top-level group is so goddamn important.
I totally understand and stand behind all the reasons and principles behind these beliefs. I just didn’t see the final conclusions as so easily cut and dry, and opening up discussions is the best way I know how to better understand other viewpoints.
sorry for reacting so strongly, and being so harsh towards you.
I really appreciate the apology and the explanation. I now understand where that fear and fight was coming from much better.
Seeing the ~society.liberation suggestion unfortunately just brought to the surface one of my absolute worst fears.
This might be partly my bad. I never meant this idea to be an either-or situation with ~lgbt. I thought of it more of a yes-and type deal, but maybe that wasn’t clear given some of the other discussion points I had opened.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentHey cfabbro, I’m really sorry you are hurting so much. I’ve been engaging in this conversation in the ways I best know how. I’ll admit I took a very academic approach that ultimately didn’t...Hey cfabbro,
I’m really sorry you are hurting so much.
I’ve been engaging in this conversation in the ways I best know how. I’ll admit I took a very academic approach that ultimately didn’t consider how you or others currently use the space here on Tildes.
We clearly don’t agree about all the specifics that have been discussed, but I think we probably share more in ideals than we disagree in these differences.
I am hopeful about Tildes being an online space where people can more effectively and safely have these types of tough discussions. I want to do the best I can to contribute to that in all ways possible.
With that in mind, I have two responses. One, is if you have space and energy I’d love to hear more about what you have seen change here on Tildes and how that relates to ~lgbt. I know there are lots of scary changes coming from places like the US Supreme Court, but I don’t have the Tildes-specific context if that makes sense.
Second, is I’d love to offer my support. I don’t really know what that means, but feel free to PM me, even if it is just to say hi, or leave me alone, or whatever.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentYeah, this is definitely a big concern. I think historically this hasn’t gone too well which is why the separate groups started to begin with. Maybe that is still where we are at in society, but I...This can only work if those people in the affected populations would feel comfortable here posting in wider groups, and I can absolutely understand if they aren’t - I imagine a lot of people have faced online and real life harassment for who they are
Yeah, this is definitely a big concern. I think historically this hasn’t gone too well which is why the separate groups started to begin with. Maybe that is still where we are at in society, but I really hope we can move away from tribalism. It would be great to get more input from more people.
Maybe there are some new moderation mechanisms that we could create to help.
For example, even if a malicious comment eventually gets removed the OP will probably see it in their notifications. Maybe there is a way for other users to label comments as as “hide-immediately” in the hope of preventing the OP from having to see that until an admin can respond and decide what to do.
The other big issue is that sometimes one person helping themselves to something can discourage others from doing the same. For example, in this comment @kfwyre shared how some men commenting on a post aimed at women affected people:
The thread about being a woman was less successful though. Several guys chipped in their thoughts. Some jokes were posted (and removed). I've seen comments since from women on the site who felt pushed away because of that and chose not to respond.
Maybe we could figure out a community moderation tool that effectively says wait your turn or something like that. It could be similar to the Offtopic label but be more aimed at creating space in the conversation for people that are more reticent to speak up.
Maybe these are all naïve hopes, but it would be really exciting if we could create a more generally inclusive system.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI really like this perspective! Part of me wonders if having identity-based groups inherently highlights differences in a way that isn’t great. I shared some of my own experiences and observations...One of the most important lanes for queer advocacy has been the broader understanding that all people everywhere are far more similar than they are different and that it's more powerful for us to be united in our perspectives rather than divided.
I really like this perspective!
Part of me wonders if having identity-based groups inherently highlights differences in a way that isn’t great. I shared some of my own experiences and observations about what happens when a society focuses too much on identity affinity in this comment.
I think a men’s group could have potential, but I think I’d prefer a more general group for everyone, which might help mitigate some of the moderation concerns @cfabbro has expressed. What would you think of something like ~society.liberation? There is probably a better name than that, but hopefully you get the idea.
-
Comment on Thoughts on making Tildes groups more independent in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI’ve thought about this one a bit already. You are right that my proposed system would force people to constantly create more and more hierarchy if the tag promotion system is automated. I think...What happens if subtags have matured to the point where further subtags become hard to justify?
I’ve thought about this one a bit already. You are right that my proposed system would force people to constantly create more and more hierarchy if the tag promotion system is automated. I think keeping it manual to start would make sense.
Longer-term there are other ways to keep the hierarchy manageable. You could make it so that direct posts are allowed to any tag that is 4-levels deep. For example, if ~comp.programming.python.help is mature maybe you no longer force people to create ~comp.programming.python.help.environment. People would be free to self-rally around adding more hierarchy if they really want to create new mature sub-tags. Then, over time if 4-levels turns out to not be enough Tildes could start enforcing 5-levels and so on.
However, part of me also thinks that limiting hierarchy to be no more than 4-5 levels might make sense site wide. Things will need to expand horizontally a lot too! Too much nesting also gets difficult, and after 4 levels I think tags are so specific that multi-posting might make more sense.
Another way to help the hierarchy feel manageable is to change how tags get displayed. For example, as you navigate the tag hierarchy, the tags displayed would be truncated. So, from ~all you might see a post tagged ~food.sandwiches.tomatoes and ~hobbies.gardening.transplanting. But, if you are browsing ~food.sandwiches, then that same post would have the tags displayed as ~….tomatoes and ~hobbies.gardening.transplanting.
Are users allowed to create subtags of immature subtags? … If so, that could be treated as an implicit vote for its promotion.
I like the idea of a mechanism like this to help determine when a tag should be promoted!
I do think that people should be allowed to create immature tags with as much specificity as they want. I see creating two immature tags at once as a sort of advanced thing to attempt that is unlikely to succeed. If a community actually gels around a double-immature tag then I think that means there was a real need for it.
I like the idea of comments being associated with the tags they originated from. I suspect though the origin of a comment will need to be explicit though. Something like allowing users to pick which tag to use when posting a top-level comment. The comments would be separated by those tags, so users can choose which "context" to look at.
I agree!
Thanks for bringing up all these good points! It really helps make all these ideas more concrete.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde (edited )LinkMore thoughts on handling groups and inclusivity One very active discussion that has been happening in this thread is how to best handle groups for marginalized people. This also gets tied up with...- Exemplary
More thoughts on handling groups and inclusivity
One very active discussion that has been happening in this thread is how to best handle groups for marginalized people. This also gets tied up with discussions about hierarchical structures and promoting inclusivity. I have been puzzling though this a bunch, and I think I finally have a new idea I am ready to share.
Principles
These are the core principles that I think most everyone will agree are important to this discussion.
-
Tildes should be promoting diversity of people
People bring up the fact that the population of Tildes is largely white, male, and somewhat techie. I think there are some statistics on this, but I don’t know how current they are. Lots of people would like to see more types of people join as the site grows -
Tildes should be promoting diversity of conversation topics
Similar to the above point, many discussions here have a similar tone and set of topic focuses. This is probably related in part to the population. However, I think that it is important to separate the idea that more diversity in post topics is different than diversity in people. We are all human and there are some human-centric topics that could be better emphasized regardless of the population -
People belonging to minority groups should feel welcomed, included, and like they have appropriate spaces for sensitive discussions.
In some ways this is a mechanism towards achieving the first two goals. However, it can also be a topic that fosters some tense reactions so we need to keep it in mind as a primary goal. -
Tildes should not default to US-centric or North American ways of thinking
This comes up a lot in relation to sport names, news cycles, etc. Again, I think this is a mechanism for helping to achieve the first two goals, but since it is a trap that a largely US-centric population can fall into I think that it needs to be highlighted.
What is the core principle we want to promote?
I initially joined the conversation focused on discussing whether or not identity groups like ~lgbt, ~women, ~poc, etc. should be top-level groups or arranged together using something like ~people.lgbt. There are lots of opinions in this space, and some people are very absolutist on both sides of the debate. However, after more reflection I am increasingly convinced that we might have been barking up the wrong tree so to speak.
While well-meaning, I think that the push to create more identity groups might backfire. Principles 1 and 2 are to encourage diversity in both population and topics. Creating more identity groups like ~lgbt seems like an easy way to signal that these people exist which might help with principle 1. However, I don’t think that adding groups for specific identities will really help with principle 2. Let me explain.
Identity groups can be toxic too
@TreeFiddyFiddy pointed out that groups like ~lgbt can become toxic in their own ways. From this comment:
I am personally much more interested in creating non-exclusive communities and am an advocate for society to evolve to become more inclusive for everyone. In-groups have successfully advocated for themselves and their inclusion in the real world but I think that the internet has up-ended this. Negative aspects of both the conservative and progressive movements are being amplified and it's literally destroying the state of American society, I feel like this site has a good chance to do things differently and find radical ways to be inclusive rather than divisive.
I have seen this type of behavior myself. The college I attended, like many, tried to promote diversity and inclusion by having lots of affinity groups on campus. However, I think this really backfired since it lead to a lot of tribalism. People quickly self-segregated into small communities that they felt comfortable in. What was supposed to help make marginalized people feel more comfortable on campus ended up just making it so that on campus politics and debates were dominated by various bands of like-minded people fighting with the same rhetoric over and over again.
Identity groups are exclusionary
Another side effect was that these identity groups started to feel more and more exclusionary. I have a mixed heritage. Because of that I never really felt comfortable engaging in the identity groups related to my heritage. It felt like I wasn’t _______ enough to fit in culturally. Therefore, it seemed like identity groups promoted some level of extremism.
Additionally, sometimes attending events put on by these affinity groups lead to some strange signaling. I once went to the queer resource center with some friends for an event that we all wanted to attend together. While there, an acquaintance welcomed me but also assumed that my presence meant that I identified as queer too. I didn’t mind this mistake, but it also made me feel like that wasn’t a place that I should go to alone since I just had to identify myself as an outsider.
Now, let’s look at how this pertains to Tildes. As an example, let’s look at issues a trans person might face. If they are in the middle of transitioning and have some medical problems where does that discussion belong?
If it goes into a group like ~lgbt, ~trans_experience, or something else like that, then it is likely that post will only be seen by other people who have self-identified as a part of those groups. This further separates a marginalized community and makes it so that these important discussions don’t appear in the same places as everyone else’s discussions do.
Now, imagine that the trans person felt comfortable sharing in a more general group like ~health.surgery. Now, that person is operating in the same spaces as every one else. The are not other anymore. Instead, they are another unique human sharing lived experiences with everyone else.
I know multi-posting mechanics could help this particular example, but we are not there yet.
Flipping the approach
I think we need to flip this conversation on its head and take a more human approach. Over in the ‘Is there anything you don't like about Tildes?’ topic @JackKerouacsLiver made some excellent points. I want to focus on this one though:
If you want to break that stereotype, then you need to break the homogeneity of the community. How are you going to do that? By giving a place for 'different' people to go.
If we want to promote diversity maybe we should focus on diversity of thoughts and topics first which will in turn invite more diverse populations. In short, I think principle 2 is actually more important than principle 1.
Take this example from JackKerouacsLiver:
I'll preface this by saying that no sexism is intended, but I can assure you that there are a number of women who come to this website, look at the list of groups, say "there is nothing here for me" and then leave. Maybe they try again in a couple years, but most probably won't.
Would creating a ~women group really solve this problem? Maybe. It certainly looks good in the list of groups. However, the tone of the group will have a large impact on whether or not people stick around and we have already seen how that can disintegrate. Let me repeat, this could backfire on users in marginalized groups and the larger population might not see it if self-segregation gets bad.
Now, what if we instead focused on creating groups that emphasize other modes of communication besides logic? What if we create groups that radically focus on common human experiences?
My group suggestions
Alright, this isn’t going to be perfect, but let’s give this a shot.
To start with, let’s create a fully inclusive group for discussing big and personal issues. I think @TreeFiddyFiddy nailed it with the suggestion for ~society which would discuss:
Well, things pertaining to society. Women's rights movements, LGBT concerns, representation for minorities, crime and justice reform, gender studies, cultural interaction and visibility, community development, religion, etc. I don't think that ~society at all lends itself to being "a place to cram a bunch of subtopics into without any purpose," it clearly has a well defined purpose that is inclusive to a legitimate area of fields of study as well as lives lived.
@Macha points out that terms/groups like ~bipoc or ~aapi are US-centric. I haven’t touched on principle 4 at all, but I put it there because I think lots of people want to take a more globally inclusive view on Tildes and it is relevant for sorting identity groups. I’m not sure what the appropriate higher level would be ~people.bipoc? ~identities.bipoc? ~affinities.bipoc? We can discuss more, but I think this points is towards creating a higher-level group.
Another reason to prefer a higher-level group like ~people is that it helps de-emphasize the path towards tribalism that has been repeated so many times.
So, now we get to the new stuff. How do we create radically inclusive groups based on shared human experiences? I’ll start by providing my own suggestion, but I hope others will chime in here.
~emotional_support or ~empathy
Everyone needs a bit of this at times. This could be a fully inclusive group for all people to seek out different perspectives on things they are going through. The nice thing about this group is it would support the types of discussions people might expect to have in ~people.women, ~people.men, ~life.relationships, etc. However, instead of segregating people based on what they are, in includes everyone based on what we all experience. It might also mean we need less sub-groups in ~people.That is it. That is my suggestion.
- Create ~society
- Move ~lgbt into a larger group (name to be determined) but that many people have been calling ~people
- Create ~emotional_support or ~empathy or some other variation where we can begin to support discussions that aren’t purely logic based.
Down the road we can add other groups or sub groups as needed. For example, people may want a place to talk about menstruation. That should not go under ~people.women since some men bleed. Therefore, there may come a time when something like ~health.hygiene is necessary.
For now though, I think I’m most interested in figuring out how we can foster more discussion diversity in ways that also effectively promotes population diversity and discourages tribalism
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI largely agree, and in the short term I think just making a bunch of requested groups is probably the way to go. However, long-term I am unconvinced. I think this is great, and I also think this...I largely agree, and in the short term I think just making a bunch of requested groups is probably the way to go. However, long-term I am unconvinced.
I like the idea of "post it, and if there's enough posts, a space will be created" and I'd prefer us to use that as the primary guidance for creating new groups.
I think this is great, and I also think this is explicitly the current philosophy on Tildes. However, it does seem like enough people have concerns about where to put stuff that it needs to be addressed.
Providing info when people register is a great first step, but I don’t think we can trust people to really absorb the info given how terms of service agreements are usually brushed past. Therefore, I think the structure of Tildes should also help signal to people that they need to start posting in order for a community to form.
I’m leaning towards the sentiment that groups as they exist here are not a great system [one example]. I think that a tags-only system would help promote the idea that anyone can use any tag they want. It also lets anyone create a new tag for whatever they want. This structural change helps signal that people should make new tags as they see fit. Then, if a tag becomes popular it can be displayed more prominently in much the same way as groups currently are.
The promotion mechanism to make a tag mature would take some thought. However, this approach seems like the only way to prevent user-created groups without making the group creation process feel tense or exclusionary.
I’m starting to think that there are good reasons other platforms have basically let group creation be a free-for-all. People like having agency, so we probably need to lean into that a bit more.
As is, making new groups is clearly a contentious topic. I don’t see this getting much easier as time goes on unless Tildes basically creates every group people ask for in a somewhat timely manner. However, that then contradicts the original philosophy that groups should grow organically.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentThis is definitely the right name for such a group! Thanks. I was having trouble with this name in one of my postsThis is definitely the right name for such a group!
Thanks. I was having trouble with this name in one of my posts
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI’m pretty sure these would never exist for exactly those reasons. Groups like that seem to only be centered around hate, intolerance, etc. ~polish on the other hand would be a great addition...… let alone post about if something like ~identities.white or ~people.white existed. Even the names of such groups kind of makes my skin crawl…
I’m pretty sure these would never exist for exactly those reasons. Groups like that seem to only be centered around hate, intolerance, etc. ~polish on the other hand would be a great addition since it is actually about a culture!
Actually, I think this example also demonstrates how hierarchies can be a mixed bag. Imagine a world where ~people.polish, ~identities.polish, and ~local.polish all existed with slightly different flavors of content.
If these different groups were effectively just tags, and you could multi-post then this system might work well! If these are separate groups with distinct sub-cultures then this could get super confusing.
The more I wrestle with the idea of hierarchical structures the more confused I get. I think maybe the relevance of hierarchy on Tildes won’t be easily understood until some of the more fundamental mechanics of the site are fully fleshed out.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentSome creative naming would certainly be fun! Despite being somewhat new here that doesn’t seem to fit in very well with current conventions that Tildes seems to follow :(.Some creative naming would certainly be fun! Despite being somewhat new here that doesn’t seem to fit in very well with current conventions that Tildes seems to follow :(.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentThe bubbling up system is one of the things I am most excited for to! I think it is also probably necessary for a higher-level group like ~people to make any sense. However, I do like what @lou...The bubbling up system is one of the things I am most excited for to! I think it is also probably necessary for a higher-level group like ~people to make any sense.
However, I do like what @lou mentioned in another comment
On another note, ~people makes no sense. Groups are meant to group content. Not people.
~lgbt is for LGBT content, not just LGBT people.
Maybe any higher-level group ultimately pigeon holes things in a way that isn’t great. I also played with the idea of a top-level ~identities group but that might just introduce a different set of connotations that are still not great.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI like what you are getting at. It seems this categorization problem is one that we will constantly be running up against. Maybe that is why all other platforms have basically just left it up to...I think if ~tildes actually becomes big, the limited directory of groups will become problematic in all areas and not just for communities with a shared identity like ~lgbt.
I like what you are getting at. It seems this categorization problem is one that we will constantly be running up against. Maybe that is why all other platforms have basically just left it up to users to create whatever spaces they want.
I guess this whole thread is really just a side-effect of this different direction Tildes is trying.
because then what is ~people even for? The "leftovers"?
I think this will largely depend on how the site mechanisms end up working. If we have a bubbling-up mechanism that has been mentioned then this group would become a somewhat curated selection of all the content in sub groups. That could be nice. However, if it really is just used as a ‘leftovers’ group then it would not be serving a good purpose and could end up being damaging.
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde (edited )Link ParentI think I initially thought of this as a strength since it could help people create groups that don’t exist yet via the tag -> group promotion mechanism that might (eventually?) exist. The...Its silly to have a group just to force every minority community into them essentially.
I think I initially thought of this as a strength since it could help people create groups that don’t exist yet via the tag -> group promotion mechanism that might (eventually?) exist. The variation as explained in your words would not be good though.
This site is completely dominated with straight white men and I believe one major factor to that is that theres no clear space made for other identities.
I would love this to change too! This has also historically been a big problem with a variety of online platforms.
I think that I was really liking the hierarchical structure because to me it signals an easy way for related groups to begin to organically separate from each other as the site grows. However, leaning too far into this idea is also probably not the right answer either since if a hierarchy eventually gets 6-levels deep than that seems like a sign things are getting too complicated.
I think the small number of groups and not allowing users to create their own groups had me thinking that top-level groups are somewhat discouraged. Maybe that isn’t the case and maybe that is the wrong approach to begin with.
————————————
Sorry about the ping. I’ll try to remember that for the future. I just saw a lot of good discussion on the parallel parts of the thread and I wanted to understand those approaches better but still respond to the parent comment I chose.
———————————
Edit: personally I appreciate pings! I find that it helps me to track discussions better since Tildes doesn’t notify people about sibling posts, only direct replies. -
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI think this is why I’m leaning towards preferring the top-level people group. If we have ~people and immediate create important sub-groups like ~people.bipoc, ~people.lgbt, etc. then it is super...One concern with creating top-level groups like this is that it it both emphasizes the importance of those groups while also creating the perception that any identity that didn’t make the cut is less important.
I think this is why I’m leaning towards preferring the top-level people group. If we have ~people and immediate create important sub-groups like ~people.bipoc, ~people.lgbt, etc. then it is super easy to expand the scope of these identity-based groups in the future.
If it didn’t exist yet, where would someone looking for a group focused on people with disabilities post? If ~lgbt and ~bipoc exist but ~people_with_disabilities doesn’t where do they turn to? ~talk? ~life?
If the identity groups are sub-groups, then if ~people.with_disabilities doesn’t exist, someone could still post in ~people and add a tag. I feel like their post would be more at home there than them trying to figure out what other top-level group they should use.
I am sensitive to the idea that this feels a lot like demoting ~lgbt as it currently stands. I don’t like that aspect. I also like the idea of signaling that Tildes is inclusive and actively trying to build these communities, but I guess that ultimately the tidy hierarchy feels more manageable in the long-term. It will help avoid some messy discussions down the road of when to add new top-level groups.
That’s where I’m at right now, but I’d love to hear from others who have the opposite opinion or have flipped opinions.
@CosmicDefect, @CannibalisticApple, @cfabbro, @dubteedub, @phoenixrises
-
Comment on Let's add (and rearrange?) some groups + a few notes about other short-term plans in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI think that preventing too many echo chambers is certainly one of the goals here! Personally, I don't think this is realistic. Tildes is growing and the desire to grow is outlined in the docs. As...Tildes isn't Reddit, and my understanding is that it isn't meant to be. The existing groups keep most of the community together instead of echo chambers, right?
I think that preventing too many echo chambers is certainly one of the goals here!
The more I read old threads and compare them to what I'm seeing posted today, I don't want to invite anyone. I don't want to help migrate Redditors, even though I asked for an invite myself.
Personally, I don't think this is realistic. Tildes is growing and the desire to grow is outlined in the docs. As more people join this site, we will naturally need to have more niche spaces and better ways of filtering content.
I want to donate, but only if Tildes retains its raison d'etre.
I am a recent Reddit transplant, but I already think that the philosophies behind this site are more than enough of a reason! If future mechanics for how this site operates are a real concern for you, then take a look at my proposal here and see what you think. Personally, I'm quite excited.
-
Comment on Music Discovery Thread: Share the Top 3 songs you’re currently obsessed with! in ~music
gaufde Link ParentYou can also branch out and look at some of the individual artists from the group too! Admittedly I haven't done that too much, but I do really like Cory Wong (Golden is the song I know best).]You can also branch out and look at some of the individual artists from the group too! Admittedly I haven't done that too much, but I do really like Cory Wong (Golden is the song I know best).]
-
Comment on Thoughts on making Tildes groups more independent in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentTrue. The nice thing about these proposals is that they can easily be implemented step-wise until the proposed system is complete (assuming @Deimos chooses a direction similar to this). As things...True. The nice thing about these proposals is that they can easily be implemented step-wise until the proposed system is complete (assuming @Deimos chooses a direction similar to this).
As things grow, and the UI moves towards a "one click submission," we will be able to learn over time where the tagging system ends up failing. Then, we can design new guardrails into the submission process and see how to improve things. The self-moderation processes would probably grow too, but hopefully most issues can be solved "upstream" instead.
-
Comment on Thoughts on making Tildes groups more independent in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentI mean the two most important things to design for are probably (1) the posting experience and ease of use for new users, and (2) strong self-moderation and categorization practices to hopefully...We can focus so much intelligence into that one spot on the backend and make sure every single submission gets the best presentation, the most detailed and accurate information, and finds the place here where it will grab the most attention from people who have directly indicated an interest in whatever it is.
I mean the two most important things to design for are probably (1) the posting experience and ease of use for new users, and (2) strong self-moderation and categorization practices to hopefully remove the need for as much manual moderation/admin work as possible.
You might be onto something with this well-designed "one click" submission processed idea!
-
Comment on Thoughts on making Tildes groups more independent in ~tildes.official
gaufde Link ParentThanks for the kind welcome! I'm excited to be here.Thanks for the kind welcome! I'm excited to be here.
You might find Ripe’s latest album interesting!
Ripe is a funk band with some brass instruments, so they tend to have a pretty unique sound. Their latest album, Bright Blues, is a collection of fun and lively songs that have some heavier lyrics. Some specific songs I like are:
Get Over
The Outcome
Brendan