[Citizendium-editors] Categories and Community-building tools
hsfrey at verizon.net
Sun Nov 12 17:23:22 EST 2006
If we go to a forum only format, I would ask that members be given the
option to sign up for a daily reminder to sign on if there is new content.
Some of us have brains and inboxes so overloaded, that we might neglect
to check, without a reminder. (Like the Flappers of Swift's Laputa,
reminding the Sages to listen or speak by tapping them with an inlated pig's
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Sanger" <sanger-lists at citizendium.org>
To: "'Dr. Peter Diem'" <onlineforschung at eunet.at>
Cc: <citizendium-editors at lists.purdue.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 1:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Citizendium-editors] Categories and Community-building tools
> Peter Diem wrote:
>> We intend to describe the "world" in a comprehensive and
>> understandable way. In order to facilitate our task, we
>> embarked on the heroic exercise to catagorize "everything".
> Again, we are categorizing *people* so that people who usually work
> on the same subject matter can work together on that subject matter on CZ.
> This is no more heroic than a new university drawing a list of schools and
> departments. (Well, maybe that *is* heroic. :-) )
>> As we "dream the impossible dream", we have drawn up a list
>> of categories to structure our work.
> No. The list of categories is a list of *groups* which do not structure
> *manage articles*. All articles are to be assigned to at least one group.
> There is no obligation that the list of categories becomes a top-level
> categorization scheme. I hope that our solution to the problem of sorting
> *people* will not prejudice questions about categorization and search.
>> 1. What about other languages, such as German ?
> We aren't starting CZ in other languages until after the English version
> well launched. We haven't formally, officially decided to have versions
> other languages. In any event, this topic is discussed on the CZ Forums
> actually has a mailing list set up: Citizendium-World. We may not ever
> start using that list, however. For the forums discussion, see:
>> 2. How many female voices in the group?
> I'm sorry to say it but, looking through a few lists of editors, women
> to make up a pretty small minority. This is something that executive
> committee member Kali Tai is unofficially assigned to think about. :-)
>> 3. If the medium "film" is given a top level category (which
>> I think is correct), then printed media, radio, and TV should
>> be awarded this status too.
> Actually, it's hard to argue with that. Either we make "Communication"
> stand for all of it, or we add at least some of the other subcategories.
>> 4. Our communication should indeed be moved to a platform
>> such as the one our Australian colleague proposed:
>> http://openacademic.org/ . But careful: if postings are not
>> signalled automatically into regular mailboxes, the platform
>> will not maintain a "universal" character but will soon
>> become the playground of a few.
> I want to keep communication on our servers, if possible. This helps
> guarantee our independence and flexibility. I'm not interested in using
> Google Groups simply because, well, it's using Google services and servers
> and therefore not sufficiently under our control. Since it's very easy
> us to set up forums, we can do it ourselves. I like the "simple machine
> forum" software that we're running at http://smf.citizendium.org/
> Citizendium-editors mailing list
> Citizendium-editors at lists.purdue.edu
More information about the Citizendium-editors