Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in or
create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| 30.11.2003
| |
|
| |
| Awww. I've just been lazy today after yesterdays hard work of organizing [[Features]] properly. I guess the next important step I should do is to write [[Preferences]] but I'm not rushing into it since the prefs can be arranged and grouped in several ways and there are possibilities to cause confusion. I've been doing some casual contributions to [[Wiktionary]], which is actually the only way available untill there are more advanced tools available for editors. Trying to systematically cover some areas is really frustrating with the current software.
| |
| ----
| |
| 29.11.2003
| |
|
| |
| Ok. [[Features]] is now has links for each implementable feature and a link to where each feature will likely be implementated. It is also much more compact providing for better browsing experience.
| |
| ----
| |
| 28.11.2003
| |
|
| |
| Today I wrote [[m:Consumerium]] mainly from the point-of-view of [[MediaWiki]] and [[Consumerium]] with appropriate links to this Wiki to briefly describe the considerations we have tackled and future considerations. It is in no way complete and I'll work on it some more bit by bit.
| |
| ----
| |
| 25.11.2003
| |
|
| |
| OK, good, after today's trolling, vandalizing, sysop uppitiness and etc., we have made good progress, and there are now exactly 342 open links in this [[R&D wiki]]. That is remarkably small for the complexity of this problem and what we are trying to change. Please review all 342 at this link:
| |
|
| |
| http://www.consumerium.org/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Wantedpages&limit=500&offset=0
| |
|
| |
| If there are ''any'' terms that are not '''''obviously''''' well-defined to anyone who knows this [[moral purchasing]] issue well, then, we should make a simple one-paragraph link to explain simply how "what links here" (to that concept) relates to the [[Consumerium buying signal]], and provide an out-link to [[w:Wikipedia]]. PLEASE DON'T put out-links in the text of ANY article - it makes it impossible to find where they are being referenced, and sends readers to Wikipedia by surprise.
| |
|
| |
| After that's done, let's write a bot to go through the remaining open links and just have it create a new page with "An aspect of [[what links here]] and [[what else links here]]... See [[w:name_of_this_article]] for details." That's fine.
| |
|
| |
| I know it's a pain to have 500 short articles that don't add much value, but, they add *some* value (encouraging people to explore common conceptual roots or common dependencies), and they *keep readers here*. There's a reason we don't have more than three or four people in this [[creative network]] - most of our best advertised pages are sending people elsewhere. That's necessary in the beginning when we're trying to educate people.
| |
|
| |
| But now, we need to establish our own slant on as many as 500 concepts that have to be well understood to make this [[healthy buying infrastructure]] [[self-funding]] and unstoppable even by [[Gus Kouwenhoven]] - ah I can spell that now! Making [[Richard Stallman]] happy with it is much harder I think.
| |
|
| |
| --------
| |
|
| |
| 24.11.2003 | | 24.11.2003 |
|
| |
|