The sub-tildes are planned to filter up into the high level group as you can check in the ~official. I think that ~games will have enough discussion and interest in and of itself that it warrants...
The sub-tildes are planned to filter up into the high level group as you can check in the ~official. I think that ~games will have enough discussion and interest in and of itself that it warrants its own top level group.
Gaming is overwhelmingly the most popular hobby I can think of, so it would absolutely get voted up enough. I wouldn't be surprised if ~hobbies.games would end up with more subscribers than...
Gaming is overwhelmingly the most popular hobby I can think of, so it would absolutely get voted up enough. I wouldn't be surprised if ~hobbies.games would end up with more subscribers than ~hobbies itself.
Over-representation doesn't have to be a problem as it has been said that they'll be able to tinker with how things lower in the hierarchy are weighted higher up in it. That said, I still think...
Over-representation doesn't have to be a problem as it has been said that they'll be able to tinker with how things lower in the hierarchy are weighted higher up in it.
That said, I still think gaming is prevalent enough that it deserves its own top level group simply because you would typically expect gaming to be its own section. For communities like these, it's functionally as wide and far-reaching of a topic as ~politics or ~tech.
Rigid taxonomy for the hierarchy is not a good idea IMO. Rigid taxonomy would dictate everything be under ~tildes, e.g. ~tildes.official.announcements, ~tildes.groups.recreation.hobby.games but I...
So while certain subjects can technically be put under others, the question we really need to ask is what do we gain or lose by doing that? Especially when it comes to really popular subjects like games that will themselves potentially have a significant amount of subgroups under them, giving them their own top-level is probably the best approach since you don't really want the hierarchy to go more than 4-5 levels deep at most for utility's sake.
Usenet didn't rely on rigid taxonomy in their hierarchy either and is a reasonably good model to use for inspiration (which ~ is). However when it came to the rec and alt usenet hierarchy I think they went a little overboard with the depth so ~ should probably learn from that and not do the same.
Right, they're called groups after usenet newsgroups but that's kind of besides the point. Even if you put all of them under ~groups instead of ~tildes.groups it would still lead to a hierarchy...
Right, they're called groups after usenet newsgroups but that's kind of besides the point. Even if you put all of them under ~groups instead of ~tildes.groups it would still lead to a hierarchy that is much to deep to be useful IMO.
I'm more worried about groups that we actually have being in a possibly incorrect order, not inventing new headings just to put existing groups under them.
I'm more worried about groups that we actually have being in a possibly incorrect order, not inventing new headings just to put existing groups under them.
I feel like those two interests are pretty unique though. Yes, there is crossover occasionally but as was said farther up video games are typically such a high representation that it would choke...
I feel like those two interests are pretty unique though. Yes, there is crossover occasionally but as was said farther up video games are typically such a high representation that it would choke out discussion of board games.
Ehh, I don't think it's really going to be about activity/interest in the future. Right now the groups are very basic and controlled because the community is tiny and and could be quickly...
Ehh, I don't think it's really going to be about activity/interest in the future. Right now the groups are very basic and controlled because the community is tiny and and could be quickly fractured if not handled properly. In the future, assuming Tildes continues to take off, you'll be able to filter out ~games.videogames but still see all other ~games posts. If the groups are implemented as explained on the mechanics page, there shouldn't really be an issue with this
Overrepresentation of gaming as a hobby might lead to choking out discussion of all other hobbies.
It'll end up being under ~hobbies.games in that case. I think it's fine as it's own thing though.
The sub-tildes are planned to filter up into the high level group as you can check in the ~official. I think that ~games will have enough discussion and interest in and of itself that it warrants its own top level group.
Only if they get voted up enough.
Gaming is overwhelmingly the most popular hobby I can think of, so it would absolutely get voted up enough. I wouldn't be surprised if ~hobbies.games would end up with more subscribers than ~hobbies itself.
Over-representation doesn't have to be a problem as it has been said that they'll be able to tinker with how things lower in the hierarchy are weighted higher up in it.
That said, I still think gaming is prevalent enough that it deserves its own top level group simply because you would typically expect gaming to be its own section. For communities like these, it's functionally as wide and far-reaching of a topic as ~politics or ~tech.
Rigid taxonomy for the hierarchy is not a good idea IMO. Rigid taxonomy would dictate everything be under ~tildes, e.g. ~tildes.official.announcements, ~tildes.groups.recreation.hobby.games but I think you can see how that would be a problem.
So while certain subjects can technically be put under others, the question we really need to ask is what do we gain or lose by doing that? Especially when it comes to really popular subjects like games that will themselves potentially have a significant amount of subgroups under them, giving them their own top-level is probably the best approach since you don't really want the hierarchy to go more than 4-5 levels deep at most for utility's sake.
Usenet didn't rely on rigid taxonomy in their hierarchy either and is a reasonably good model to use for inspiration (which ~ is). However when it came to the rec and alt usenet hierarchy I think they went a little overboard with the depth so ~ should probably learn from that and not do the same.
The name of ~tildes refers to the workings of the site, not the fact that the different branches are also called "tildes".
Right, they're called groups after usenet newsgroups but that's kind of besides the point. Even if you put all of them under ~groups instead of ~tildes.groups it would still lead to a hierarchy that is much to deep to be useful IMO.
I'm more worried about groups that we actually have being in a possibly incorrect order, not inventing new headings just to put existing groups under them.
why are board games and video games in the same group?
I feel like those two interests are pretty unique though. Yes, there is crossover occasionally but as was said farther up video games are typically such a high representation that it would choke out discussion of board games.
Ehh, I don't think it's really going to be about activity/interest in the future. Right now the groups are very basic and controlled because the community is tiny and and could be quickly fractured if not handled properly. In the future, assuming Tildes continues to take off, you'll be able to filter out ~games.videogames but still see all other ~games posts. If the groups are implemented as explained on the mechanics page, there shouldn't really be an issue with this
It will eventually get sub branches for each of them.
Ok didn't really understand branches but that makes sense