Let's be modern here! Propose we be First with *Smart Tags*

Post #4,662 by Ashton 8/11/01 6:49:10 PM Reply	Let's be modern here! Propose we be First with Smart Tags Let every link we click-on, trigger an appropriate sister-link with message: If it's "security" related - A click (also) sends e-mail to a variety of selected journalists, congresspersons - with links re "The IIS Record" or some other stats separating the concepts, "Web Problems" and "M$ Software Problems". If it's "monopoly?" related - Ditto links re Ed Curry, DRDOS (and actual amount of that settlement), STAX, a litany of other er events. To other selected journalists, congresspersons. And so on, for other categories - See, with a bit of scripting - each time we click on a link we can accomplish that which so few of us ever actually get around to doing.. (now be honest here about number of letters actually Sent): Add Our Spin to Their Spin, via same medium and to same talking-heads - and via Their own cute plan for world domination. Ashton Adversaries Ltd. \ufffd 2001 where the sheep meet to plan the incarceration of the shepherd and of the slaughterhouse operator. All royalties for licensed use of this scheme - shall be spent for commissioning better scripting, less overhead for the founder's Cisitalia restoration. Let a million messages bloom. Let ten thousand upset Admen cringe. May the better authors win! (It never Was about.. Truth, just Volume)
Post #4,674 by boxley 8/11/01 8:51:53 PM Reply	Lets do something else instead Create a think tank forum. Populate with a question of the day/week/whever a good question arises. Responses shall be measured, thought out spellchecked and Common gamatical rules apply. It should be a document as opposed to visual speech. apply a position paper to be read, group written with a dissent if someone so pleases. This would/can be desimenated to the whoevers and establish us as useful Think Tank like the big guys and we can start charging like the Gartner Group or Center for International policy and we let Imric show up on Rivera Live. That way we have a forum for rants(flame) and for rational(think tank) thanx, bill Our bureaucracy and our laws have turned the world into a clean, safe work camp. We are raising a nation of slaves. Chuck Palahniuk
Post #4,698 by Ashton 8/11/01 11:53:17 PM Reply	Could be.. Andy's 'position papers' on aaxnet are a good specimen; dissemination - where most effectively sent? [before They come to Us because we be seen to be so Wise(ass)] ! Etc. Guess we can see if anyone wants to play - better than another replay of the ontological proof of God (?) Talk is cheap, but it can.. sometimes umm
Post #4,704 by boxley 8/12/01 1:05:28 AM Reply	Every one here has something to offer and an opinion on everything under the sun. Some good some bad many would be better if knowing they would be more widely disseminated than here. First Topic Within the current constitutional guidelines what can be done to ensure fair, impartial, timely ballot rendering and counting re presidential elections to avoid the problems seen in Florida during the last election cycle. That would furnish a statement that could entail suggestions, remarks, dissents and a draft report with/without dissent and a final report. Submit same to News organisations under the byline IWETHEY think tank. It is evergreen news(evergreen can be published anytime especially on a slow news day) so will be published. Lets give it a whorl and see what turns up or out. thanx, bill Our bureaucracy and our laws have turned the world into a clean, safe work camp. We are raising a nation of slaves. Chuck Palahniuk
Post #4,867 by mhuber 8/13/01 12:32:35 PM Reply	Sounds more like a Wiki than threaded But I think you are looking for something with a little more time dimension and a lot more structure. Might want to include a voting mechanism. Definitely a revision system. I think, other than a single revisable dissent and a possible side-thread, we would want to get away from the reply-reply-reply pattern we use currently. Nothing against that pattern, but if it were allowed we would just fall back into it an do exactly what we are doing here. So here's my proposed Use Case: 1) A question is posed. 2) Several people post proposed articles. So far, this is exactly what we do now - here is where divergence starts. There is only one level for the articles. People may post counter-articles, but those would be at the same level. And references to proposed articles are discouraged, because most of the proposed articles are going to a deep archive. - Each proposed article has a thread. Possibly here, preferably as a part of the article object. 3) After a pre-determined period (I'm thinking a week is slightly long), a proposed article is selected. Could be selected by vote, could be by volume of discussion. A dissent is attatched to the article, either one of the other proposed articles or a blank one. The idea of the dissent is that no-one is refused a voice in the result. 4) The author, or an editor, rolls new content from the discussion thread into the article. The author of the dissent does the same. 5) The group verifies that the revised article and the dissent reflects the views expressed in the discussion. GOTO 4. 6) An editor corrects spelling and grammar. White guys in suits know best - Pat McCurdy

Welcome to IWETHEY!