I think that at this point, Tildes is at a size where there's no real distinguishing community between groups; the groups have the same people, generally. So this ends up being something like...
I think that at this point, Tildes is at a size where there's no real distinguishing community between groups; the groups have the same people, generally. So this ends up being something like "what topics do you like?"
That's okay, but I'm also interested in what's going to happen when we get to the point that there's a distinct community feeling between groups.
It is supposed to be a bit like "What topics are you feeling the most right now?" If you know what people like, you have a good idea of what they aren't feeling right now; and things that are...
It is supposed to be a bit like "What topics are you feeling the most right now?"
If you know what people like, you have a good idea of what they aren't feeling right now; and things that are maybe being catered to a bit less than your average user'd like. With a grasp on that, you can start to get a bit stronger at user retention, and just understanding a community in general, really.
Honestly, I think that it's pretty likely that the only group that's going to be distinctly [GROUP] will be ~sports; just because it's such a radically different one.
Unlike reddit's start, Tildes is getting a really strong community-forum vibe to it all; and sites that start like that tend to stay like it, usually. It's why on old phpBB forums, you'll see the same hundred and fifty users or so on every post: if you like the people there, anything can be fun to talk about.
With all due respect: I hope you're wrong. I hope that each group does have its own distinct feel. I don't want ~books to feel like ~tech, or ~lgbt to feel like ~comp. I want them to be different.
I think that it's pretty likely that the only group that's going to be distinctly [GROUP] will be ~sports; just because it's such a radically different one.
With all due respect: I hope you're wrong. I hope that each group does have its own distinct feel. I don't want ~books to feel like ~tech, or ~lgbt to feel like ~comp. I want them to be different.
So, in your opinion, what's the point of groups at all? If you want to get as many people into as many different subjects as possible, I would imagine a better design would be to have just one...
So, in your opinion, what's the point of groups at all? If you want to get as many people into as many different subjects as possible, I would imagine a better design would be to have just one single page of posts, with no groups at all. If necessary, we could use tags to identify topics. But why have groups at all if you want as many people as possible to see as much as possible?
Groups allow for sorting in a really organised fashion—a bit like a folder. Sorting is a good thing. Meanwhile, tags are a bit like metadata—it'll tell you the subgenre, the date the work was...
Groups allow for sorting in a really organised fashion—a bit like a folder. Sorting is a good thing. Meanwhile, tags are a bit like metadata—it'll tell you the subgenre, the date the work was written, who it's about, etc.
There's a difference between forcing people to look at things and encouraging them to. I.e. defaults are a good thing, being able to unsubscribe if absolutely wanted is a good thing, but mainly we should want everyone in as many places as possible.
But why? If everyone should be subscribed to them all anyway, what's the point? Just use the tags to identify "this post is about computing", "this post is about food", "this post is about...
Groups allow for sorting in a really organised fashion—a bit like a folder. Sorting is a good thing.
But why? If everyone should be subscribed to them all anyway, what's the point? Just use the tags to identify "this post is about computing", "this post is about food", "this post is about movies". Why create groups for that, when tags will perform the function just as well?
we should want everyone in as many places as possible.
Why? I have nearly zero interest in computers beyond being a user of them. Why should a "regressive" person like me be subscribed to ~comp? I've got no interest in food beyond eating it: cooking it, reading about it, these have no interest for me. Why should I be subscribed to ~food? And so on. Why should I be expected to see content I have no interest in? EDIT: Why clutter up my feed with stuff I'm only going to scroll past to get to the stuff I want?
Seeing this content won't magically spark an interest in me: being subjected to endless posts about programming or recipes won't suddenly make me want to become a progammer or a chef. So what's the point?
Why can't people opt in to groups they want, rather than being required to opt out of groups they don't want?
Discovery, simple. Unless there ends up with massive group bloat, which I'm fairly sure Deimos's stated he wants to avoid, opt-out will get people to at least take a look at different groups...
Discovery, simple. Unless there ends up with massive group bloat, which I'm fairly sure Deimos's stated he wants to avoid, opt-out will get people to at least take a look at different groups before choosing not to view them. It allows for a lot better distribution of users, and again - allows a site culture unlike how reddit echo chambers people on any given side of the political spectrum, or how Twitter does. Opt-out makes far more sense in this case, in my opinion at least, and again - I sincerely hope it stays that way.
Also, I'd like to add that you'ven't been called "regressive" in the context of not wanting to be a software engineer ever, to my knowledge; at least not on this site, so it seems a bit silly (and a bit on the side of purposely provocative) to bring up, given the missing context of the statement. You seem to be taking your position in this argument based on a personal issue here, so I really don't see a tonne of productive or positive things coming from continuing this conversation, and think I'll be refraining from getting into it. Cheers, have a good one.
An opt-in model would present new users with a list of groups to subscribe to. They would have to look at them to make their choice. I was described as having a regressive mindset in the context...
opt-out will get people to at least take a look at different groups before choosing not to view them.
An opt-in model would present new users with a list of groups to subscribe to. They would have to look at them to make their choice.
I'd like to add that you'ven't been called "regressive" in the context of not wanting to be a software engineer ever, to my knowledge; at least not on this site
I was described as having a regressive mindset in the context of saying I didn't want to learn how to use a computer system that I have no interest in. I think that's relevant here, when your model would present people like me with content we're simply not interested in.
You seem to be taking your position in this argument based on a personal issue here
No. Never. I am arguing what I sincerely believe, as always.
I merely used the recent example of being called "regressive" to highlight how much some people are simply not interested in certain topics, because I knew you'd be familiar with that situation.
I'm really happy with ~music lately! I don't begrudge anyone threads like "Do you like any albums that the rest of an artist's fanbase despised..." but list threads on music groups rarely generate...
I don't begrudge anyone threads like "Do you like any albums that the rest of an artist's fanbase despised..." but list threads on music groups rarely generate interesting discussion, and comments there are often just ways for people to express that they too like the same band that was mentioned in the parent comment (OP, I am definitely not trying to pick on you here! This kind of thread can, and will happen, and I'd bet most other users don't mind them at all).
That said, we've started (or maybe they've always been there, but I hadn't noticed) getting some really interesting submissions from @EightRoundsRapid (among others), and most song submissions have been accompanied by a comment from the OP describing what they liked or found special about it (huge plus -- furthers discussion). We've also some great jazz radio submissions from @boredop, and today we got what was probably the best submission we've had yet on ~music:
I learned about a completely new genre of music (to me), and a wealth of music sharing and discussion went on on the comments. Compare that to the most commented on posts in ~music and you'll see that it's about the first one that doesn't start with:
I had it tagged as fluff before to try and make it filterable; but maybe filtering by ask would work? also, I made a conscious decision not to have my comment on any band come before someone else...
I don't begrudge anyone threads like "Do you like any albums that the rest of an artist's fanbase despised..." but list threads on music groups rarely generate interesting discussion, and comments there are often just ways for people to express that they too like the same band that was mentioned in the parent comment (OP, I am definitely not trying to pick on you here! This kind of thread can, and will happen).
I had it tagged as fluff before to try and make it filterable; but maybe filtering by ask would work? also, I made a conscious decision not to have my comment on any band come before someone else had made a comment; just wanna defend myself here.
And on the most commented page you linked, are you looking at the same page as I am...? It's down really low on the page, and below a lot of non-favourite posts.
But yeah definitely love submissions that're a bit fun like that. ~music's great so far!
Hmm, I'm definitely being bit over-critical (which is my nature for music :P), but in /r/letstalkmusic, which in it's hayday (a few years back) was probably one of the best music discussion groups...
Hmm, I'm definitely being bit over-critical (which is my nature for music :P), but in /r/letstalkmusic, which in it's hayday (a few years back) was probably one of the best music discussion groups that's ever existed on the internet, there are a couple of rules:
No Recommendation Threads: Unless there is a deeper level of discussion to the question, recommendation threads should be put in the general discussion post.
List Threads Allowed (Provisional): List threads have grown popular here and have generated a lot of good discussion and content. We encourage list threads ONLY if they are in-depth and generate parent replies with quality content. Mods reserve the right to lock / remove any threads that they deem do not fit these criteria. Low-effort parent replies will be removed with extreme prejudice.
But if you look at the most commented page I linked the top five are:
Post one of your favorite songs have other tilderados recommend a related song
-> recommendation
What artists do you wish would go back to their roots/an older sound of theirs?
-> list
Let's do something different: What are your favorite video game OSTs?
-> list
How do you listen to music?
-> Neither
What Have You Been Listening To This Week?
-> both
and so on down the list. That submission is the first time that I can tell that an actual music submission organically created lots of discussion, which is really cool!
I had it tagged as fluff before to try and make it filterable; but maybe filtering by ask would work?
I don't actually have any tags filtered out right now, because I want to see everything but ~test, but you're right, if that style of submission bothers me, I should filter it out (is it bad that I forget that that's a thing here?). The thing is it doesn't bother me too much as long as it's not the dominant type of submissions for the group, e.g., /r/letstalkmusicdoes have weekly discussions for "what have you been listening to", album discussions etc., alongside interesting discussions on the exploitative nature of K-pop, in-depth analysis of MF Doom lyrics, whether Trump could cause a resurgence in punk, and just to make me eat my own words, mother of all list threads (<-- seriously check that one out, so much good stuff going on in there).
I fear I've become to negative already, which wasn't my intention in this thread! I was trying to say that I'm happy that content I find really interesting has been making it's way to ~music lately, not trying to ruin anyone else's good time!
Ha. My first username mention. Most of the stuff I've posted has gone pretty much unnoticed and unremarked. That doesn't really bother me though, but sometimes it's disappointing. These are a...
That said, we've started (or maybe they've always been there, but I hadn't noticed) getting some really interesting submissions from @EightRoundsRapid (among others)
Ha. My first username mention. Most of the stuff I've posted has gone pretty much unnoticed and unremarked. That doesn't really bother me though, but sometimes it's disappointing. These are a couple I thought would generate some interest, but sadly sunk faster than a lead submarine filled with concrete
I had seen that DJ Brun set, but not the Dr. Pepper mix (which is right up my alley), so thanks for repost! If I can flatter you for a second, I don't always love what you submit (I tend not to be...
I had seen that DJ Brun set, but not the Dr. Pepper mix (which is right up my alley), so thanks for repost! If I can flatter you for a second, I don't always love what you submit (I tend not to be into DJ/electro stuff as much), but I always find it interesting!
I mean, even I don't like like all the stuff I've posted, but it's been interesting enough for me that I think it deserves an audience. I tend to find stuff that intrigues me the most interesting...
I mean, even I don't like like all the stuff I've posted, but it's been interesting enough for me that I think it deserves an audience. I tend to find stuff that intrigues me the most interesting listening. That means I listen to a large amount bizarre and virtually unlistenable dross as a by product of exploration.
That definitely happens to me as well, though I'd say I more commonly trawl through large amounts of mediocre albums because the artist (or compilation) had a few gems. Fun example time, Smokey...
That definitely happens to me as well, though I'd say I more commonly trawl through large amounts of mediocre albums because the artist (or compilation) had a few gems.
Of course, it's can be really fun. For instance, after a show recently a few friends and I were sitting around and someone put on something that sounded... kind of like air-raid sirens? Being the person I am, I mentioned that if we were going to listen to an air-raid, we might as well do it the right way :P
While its not one of our more active communities I do enjoy ~books There are a lot of avid readers here and they always seem ready to participate in discussion.
While its not one of our more active communities I do enjoy ~books
There are a lot of avid readers here and they always seem ready to participate in discussion.
I don't know if I have a favourite group, as such. I feel responsible for ~humanities, given that I suggested it, so I watch over it like a helicopter father: posting topics there to keep it...
I don't know if I have a favourite group, as such.
I feel responsible for ~humanities, given that I suggested it, so I watch over it like a helicopter father: posting topics there to keep it active, and making sure that the other topics there are relevant (moving topics out to more relevant groups if they're not, and moving them in from other groups if they are). I just realised that I don't feel the same responsibility for ~life, which was the other group I suggested, so maybe ~humanities is a favourite group of mine, after all. :) It's certainly the group I spend the most time in: whether posting topics, reading what other people have posted, or curating it.
The other groups I spend most time reading or participating in are (in no particular order): ~science, ~books, ~tv, ~lgbt.
It's not that weird. It's not like we all have to post on all the groups here! haha I'm one of the most prolific posters on Tildes, and I've never posted in about a third of the groups here (I...
It's not that weird. It's not like we all have to post on all the groups here! haha I'm one of the most prolific posters on Tildes, and I've never posted in about a third of the groups here (I unsubscribed from them in my first week here). That's exactly as it should be: we get to focus on the content which interests us, and ignore the content which doesn't interest us.
Mine are ~books and ~humanities. The community at ~books is great, we recently started a recurring thread on what books people are currently reading (see here and here), and it got so much more...
Mine are ~books and ~humanities. The community at ~books is great, we recently started a recurring thread on what books people are currently reading (see here and here), and it got so much more participation than I expected, and all of it were quality participation, no "I'm reading this book, kthxbye". Lots of nice discussion happened. (The next one will be on 14th Sep Fri, and every 2 weeks from then on, I invite everyone to participate.)
I haven't gotten to participate that much in ~humanities but I will be doing so in the future, hopefully. I'm a humanist (literature BA, aiming to do a linguistics MA and then possibly a PhD in that area too), and people like us don't have as many places to interact as tech people (though admittedly I am part of both), having this sort of place, especially on a platform like Tildes is invaluable.
I agree. The community is just too small to warrant looking through specific groups. I feel like at the moment viewing from the homepage gives the most amount of content and activity.
I agree. The community is just too small to warrant looking through specific groups. I feel like at the moment viewing from the homepage gives the most amount of content and activity.
I think that at this point, Tildes is at a size where there's no real distinguishing community between groups; the groups have the same people, generally. So this ends up being something like "what topics do you like?"
That's okay, but I'm also interested in what's going to happen when we get to the point that there's a distinct community feeling between groups.
It is supposed to be a bit like "What topics are you feeling the most right now?"
If you know what people like, you have a good idea of what they aren't feeling right now; and things that are maybe being catered to a bit less than your average user'd like. With a grasp on that, you can start to get a bit stronger at user retention, and just understanding a community in general, really.
Honestly, I think that it's pretty likely that the only group that's going to be distinctly [GROUP] will be ~sports; just because it's such a radically different one.
Unlike reddit's start, Tildes is getting a really strong community-forum vibe to it all; and sites that start like that tend to stay like it, usually. It's why on old phpBB forums, you'll see the same hundred and fifty users or so on every post: if you like the people there, anything can be fun to talk about.
With all due respect: I hope you're wrong. I hope that each group does have its own distinct feel. I don't want ~books to feel like ~tech, or ~lgbt to feel like ~comp. I want them to be different.
Yes - if everything is the same, then there's no sense at all to having groups, and we lose the biggest way to categorize topics.
Personally, I'd prefer that I was right. Getting as many people into as many different subjects as possible is something I think is ideal.
So, in your opinion, what's the point of groups at all? If you want to get as many people into as many different subjects as possible, I would imagine a better design would be to have just one single page of posts, with no groups at all. If necessary, we could use tags to identify topics. But why have groups at all if you want as many people as possible to see as much as possible?
Groups allow for sorting in a really organised fashion—a bit like a folder. Sorting is a good thing. Meanwhile, tags are a bit like metadata—it'll tell you the subgenre, the date the work was written, who it's about, etc.
There's a difference between forcing people to look at things and encouraging them to. I.e. defaults are a good thing, being able to unsubscribe if absolutely wanted is a good thing, but mainly we should want everyone in as many places as possible.
But why? If everyone should be subscribed to them all anyway, what's the point? Just use the tags to identify "this post is about computing", "this post is about food", "this post is about movies". Why create groups for that, when tags will perform the function just as well?
Why? I have nearly zero interest in computers beyond being a user of them. Why should a "regressive" person like me be subscribed to ~comp? I've got no interest in food beyond eating it: cooking it, reading about it, these have no interest for me. Why should I be subscribed to ~food? And so on. Why should I be expected to see content I have no interest in? EDIT: Why clutter up my feed with stuff I'm only going to scroll past to get to the stuff I want?
Seeing this content won't magically spark an interest in me: being subjected to endless posts about programming or recipes won't suddenly make me want to become a progammer or a chef. So what's the point?
Why can't people opt in to groups they want, rather than being required to opt out of groups they don't want?
Discovery, simple. Unless there ends up with massive group bloat, which I'm fairly sure Deimos's stated he wants to avoid, opt-out will get people to at least take a look at different groups before choosing not to view them. It allows for a lot better distribution of users, and again - allows a site culture unlike how reddit echo chambers people on any given side of the political spectrum, or how Twitter does. Opt-out makes far more sense in this case, in my opinion at least, and again - I sincerely hope it stays that way.
Also, I'd like to add that you'ven't been called "regressive" in the context of not wanting to be a software engineer ever, to my knowledge; at least not on this site, so it seems a bit silly (and a bit on the side of purposely provocative) to bring up, given the missing context of the statement. You seem to be taking your position in this argument based on a personal issue here, so I really don't see a tonne of productive or positive things coming from continuing this conversation, and think I'll be refraining from getting into it. Cheers, have a good one.
An opt-in model would present new users with a list of groups to subscribe to. They would have to look at them to make their choice.
I was described as having a regressive mindset in the context of saying I didn't want to learn how to use a computer system that I have no interest in. I think that's relevant here, when your model would present people like me with content we're simply not interested in.
No. Never. I am arguing what I sincerely believe, as always.
I merely used the recent example of being called "regressive" to highlight how much some people are simply not interested in certain topics, because I knew you'd be familiar with that situation.
I'm really happy with ~music lately!
I don't begrudge anyone threads like "Do you like any albums that the rest of an artist's fanbase despised..." but list threads on music groups rarely generate interesting discussion, and comments there are often just ways for people to express that they too like the same band that was mentioned in the parent comment (OP, I am definitely not trying to pick on you here! This kind of thread can, and will happen, and I'd bet most other users don't mind them at all).
That said, we've started (or maybe they've always been there, but I hadn't noticed) getting some really interesting submissions from @EightRoundsRapid (among others), and most song submissions have been accompanied by a comment from the OP describing what they liked or found special about it (huge plus -- furthers discussion). We've also some great jazz radio submissions from @boredop, and today we got what was probably the best submission we've had yet on ~music:
I learned about a completely new genre of music (to me), and a wealth of music sharing and discussion went on on the comments. Compare that to the most commented on posts in ~music and you'll see that it's about the first one that doesn't start with:
I had it tagged as
fluffbefore to try and make it filterable; but maybe filtering byaskwould work?also, I made a conscious decision not to have my comment on any band come before someone else had made a comment; just wanna defend myself here.And on the most commented page you linked, are you looking at the same page as I am...? It's down really low on the page, and below a lot of non-favourite posts.
But yeah definitely love submissions that're a bit fun like that. ~music's great so far!
Hmm, I'm definitely being bit over-critical (which is my nature for music :P), but in /r/letstalkmusic, which in it's hayday (a few years back) was probably one of the best music discussion groups that's ever existed on the internet, there are a couple of rules:
But if you look at the most commented page I linked the top five are:
-> recommendation
-> list
-> list
-> Neither
-> both
and so on down the list. That submission is the first time that I can tell that an actual music submission organically created lots of discussion, which is really cool!
I don't actually have any tags filtered out right now, because I want to see everything but ~test, but you're right, if that style of submission bothers me, I should filter it out (is it bad that I forget that that's a thing here?). The thing is it doesn't bother me too much as long as it's not the dominant type of submissions for the group, e.g., /r/letstalkmusic does have weekly discussions for "what have you been listening to", album discussions etc., alongside interesting discussions on the exploitative nature of K-pop, in-depth analysis of MF Doom lyrics, whether Trump could cause a resurgence in punk, and just to make me eat my own words, mother of all list threads (<-- seriously check that one out, so much good stuff going on in there).
I fear I've become to negative already, which wasn't my intention in this thread! I was trying to say that I'm happy that content I find really interesting has been making it's way to ~music lately, not trying to ruin anyone else's good time!
Ha. My first username mention. Most of the stuff I've posted has gone pretty much unnoticed and unremarked. That doesn't really bother me though, but sometimes it's disappointing. These are a couple I thought would generate some interest, but sadly sunk faster than a lead submarine filled with concrete
https://tildes.net/~music/5b8/le_mellotron_dj_brun%C3%B3
https://tildes.net/~music/3zz/angelo_cruzman_dr_peppers_lonely_soda_drinkers_club_pt1
I had seen that DJ Brun set, but not the Dr. Pepper mix (which is right up my alley), so thanks for repost! If I can flatter you for a second, I don't always love what you submit (I tend not to be into DJ/electro stuff as much), but I always find it interesting!
I mean, even I don't like like all the stuff I've posted, but it's been interesting enough for me that I think it deserves an audience. I tend to find stuff that intrigues me the most interesting listening. That means I listen to a large amount bizarre and virtually unlistenable dross as a by product of exploration.
That definitely happens to me as well, though I'd say I more commonly trawl through large amounts of mediocre albums because the artist (or compilation) had a few gems.
Fun example time, Smokey 007 -> really amazing, but hard to find, Bahamian soul / funk. But if you dig too deep on YT, you end up in rake and scrape hell, the funny part is that Ronnie has some amazing tracks in his own right.
Of course, it's can be really fun. For instance, after a show recently a few friends and I were sitting around and someone put on something that sounded... kind of like air-raid sirens? Being the person I am, I mentioned that if we were going to listen to an air-raid, we might as well do it the right way :P
While its not one of our more active communities I do enjoy ~books
There are a lot of avid readers here and they always seem ready to participate in discussion.
Books are fantastic, and the group is proving to not be too different in that regard!
I don't know if I have a favourite group, as such.
I feel responsible for ~humanities, given that I suggested it, so I watch over it like a helicopter father: posting topics there to keep it active, and making sure that the other topics there are relevant (moving topics out to more relevant groups if they're not, and moving them in from other groups if they are). I just realised that I don't feel the same responsibility for ~life, which was the other group I suggested, so maybe ~humanities is a favourite group of mine, after all. :) It's certainly the group I spend the most time in: whether posting topics, reading what other people have posted, or curating it.
The other groups I spend most time reading or participating in are (in no particular order): ~science, ~books, ~tv, ~lgbt.
I've actually never posted on ~humanities, weird! Interesting! I should make an effort to look at it at some point.
It's not that weird. It's not like we all have to post on all the groups here! haha I'm one of the most prolific posters on Tildes, and I've never posted in about a third of the groups here (I unsubscribed from them in my first week here). That's exactly as it should be: we get to focus on the content which interests us, and ignore the content which doesn't interest us.
It's moreover, it does interest me; all the present groups do. I just didn't even know it existed until now, which is quaint.
Oh. Well, if you don't know about ~humanities, you might have missed the three other groups that were added at the same time: ~anime, ~enviro, ~life.
I saw things from ~life and ~anime before; how weird. Maybe they're just a bit low-activity at the moment?
Mine are ~books and ~humanities. The community at ~books is great, we recently started a recurring thread on what books people are currently reading (see here and here), and it got so much more participation than I expected, and all of it were quality participation, no "I'm reading this book, kthxbye". Lots of nice discussion happened. (The next one will be on 14th Sep Fri, and every 2 weeks from then on, I invite everyone to participate.)
I haven't gotten to participate that much in ~humanities but I will be doing so in the future, hopefully. I'm a humanist (literature BA, aiming to do a linguistics MA and then possibly a PhD in that area too), and people like us don't have as many places to interact as tech people (though admittedly I am part of both), having this sort of place, especially on a platform like Tildes is invaluable.
That's awesome! Glad you're enjoying them! I should spend more time on ~books, actually!
~tech, ~comp and ~talk. But I don't visit groups directly, I am subscribed to everything and click on topics I find interesting in my front page.
I agree. The community is just too small to warrant looking through specific groups. I feel like at the moment viewing from the homepage gives the most amount of content and activity.
Tildes is very friendly overall, but ~talk is so cozy I feel I’m talking to my own friends :)
That's great!