8 votes

When subgroups come out, each group should have a .ask or .asktildes subgroup.

With so many threads asking about what operating system people use, favorite music, favorite tv-shows, etc, I feel like this is a good subgroup for all of the groups (other than maybe tildes and talk).

4 comments

  1. pseudolobster
    Link
    There's been talk of making ~music.talk the equivalent of ~talk.music Personally I think tags are a better way to accomplish this. https://tildes.net/~music?tag=ask prevents subgroup sprawl, and...

    There's been talk of making ~music.talk the equivalent of ~talk.music

    Personally I think tags are a better way to accomplish this. https://tildes.net/~music?tag=ask prevents subgroup sprawl, and allows you to widen the scope to all groups by doing https://tildes.net/?tag=ask or narrow the scope by doing https://tildes.net/music.subgenre?tag=ask

    9 votes
  2. unknown user
    Link
    I feel like there's going to be a lot of discussion about the hierarchy and organisation of topics, and I'm not sure anyone, even Deimos, has a perfectly-scaling idea of how it works, beyond...

    I feel like there's going to be a lot of discussion about the hierarchy and organisation of topics, and I'm not sure anyone, even Deimos, has a perfectly-scaling idea of how it works, beyond currently just playing it fairly cautious and only introducing new groups when there is really visible demand for one, not just introducing new groups on-request.

    I like the ~tildes & ~tildes.official distinction, which sets a clear precedent for separating discussions. However, it does also seem that sub-tildes may end up being used for both topic classifications, i.e. ~tech.hardware vs ~tech.politics (god forbid we ever need to reproduce r/technology here), but also for classifying types of discussion, i.e. ~tech.ask vs ~tech.help. Are both of these styles compatible with each other? How deep do we want to nest things? I think the only thing I'm fairly positive about is that I don't think we should aim to reproduce reddit's flat content structure. It's okay to be different!

    I also haven't seen much in the way of discussion about how to handle the inversion of content. i.e. do we have both ~tech.space, and ~space.tech? Are symlinks going to be a thing, and we end up with instead of a tree structure, a graph? There's a lot of interesting questions that are unanswered, and that's entirely okay.

    I don't exactly have an answer for you, but it's an interesting topic!

    5 votes
  3. [2]
    cptcobalt
    Link
    I'm less of a fan of ~something.ask and more of a fan of ~something.talk for this purpose. I feel like .talk groups should be more chill and open (such as roundtable discussions of what you've...

    I'm less of a fan of ~something.ask and more of a fan of ~something.talk for this purpose.

    I feel like .talk groups should be more chill and open (such as roundtable discussions of what you've read, or what shows you've watched), where .ask groups should people speaking with authority and fact about a topic (such as, Can someone explain the difference between continental and analytic philosophy?).

    4 votes
    1. s4b3r6
      Link Parent
      Then we could have ~X.talk always just point to ~talk.X, which makes the tree less expansive.

      Then we could have ~X.talk always just point to ~talk.X, which makes the tree less expansive.