Name tagging and subscriptions ... a fuller treatment.

About: What @mark hid ... I think it is hilarious! Does @seth? - comment 58379

Navigator says ...
Okay. So in summary.
  1. If you fork a comment, only the new thought appears in the news. No new comments, even if name tagged, will appear to others.
  2. If you move other comments to the new forked thought, the owners of the comments will be subscribed as if they wrote the comments there.
  3. If you want others to look at the new forked thought explicitly, you should name tag them in the body of the thought or the thought title. (about title does not count … it is not scanned for tags).
  4. After an explicitly “thought name tagged person” looks at the thought, or after the news item is out of date range for the whole news list, the name tagging preferential top list status goes away and the news item falls off normally.
Sounds complex, but works really smoothly and naturally. The only thing you may ever need to know is that if you name tag someone in a comment of a thought they are not subscribed to … they will never see the name tagging. You have to draw people to your stuff in the thought and entice them to subscribe … and by these rules, it has to be you, the owner, who does the drawing.
And don’t forget to leave a thought without liking it, if you do like it! Then you will be in the loop!

Tags

  1. hashtags
  2. bamtags
  3. tag evolution
  4. new language
  5. hash
  6. hashtag
  7. hastag
  8. noidea
  9. consciousness
  10. iwantyoutolookhere
  11. idontthinkso
  12. callthatguyajerk
  13. playidea
  14. sethhere
  15. uniquelabeled
  16. yourFullOfShit
  17. markmywords
  18. myhashtags
  19. hashtages
  20. hashtagged
  21. hashtage
  22. hasthtags
  23. listedthatabove
  24. ThisIsGood
  25. HellYes
  26. ThatIsVeryKewl
  27. Augs
  28. BamTag
  29. Aug
  30. yesMark
  31. DoesThisShitHelp
  32. hardForMeToImagine
  33. assaidbefore
  34. NotHappening
  35. WhatAllThatIsAbout
  36. okay

Comments


Holmes says
So yes dear @nathan … here you have it. If you want to subscribe people, simply name tag them in the thought, title or body, and that will subscribe them to everything.

In fact, this ability might just be enough … we surely don’t need a bunch of extra code around to bubble name tags up from comments. And in fact, this allows one to explicitly control who gets subscribed anew, perhaps leaving those behind who may be name tagged in transferred comments, but are undesired in the new context. Though, anyone who owns a comment will automatically come along.

Cool huh @seth?

Si says
But as seen at thought 21453, only the thought owner can do this Sherlock … I could not draw @seth into @mark’s conversation there. Only he can … how’s that stack up in your tardis?

Holmes says
Pretty good if you ask me Sir! This gives subscription-of-others control to the thought owner only … that seems like a good way to keep things under some sense of modicum.

Si says
Well, not as voluptuous a name tagging feature as FB has … but then this is more like the wild west here, where there are shootouts and gun fights galore, and the sheriff is rarely in town. He is always off doing wizzard shit null in some cave or other in the mountains. This ain’t no city cafe’ like FB!  

So perhaps this is a good way to keep the peace in these here parts! Don’t want no complaints about your cattle grazing uninvited in your neighbors pasture! That there is a hanging offence!  

Holmes says
Well realize dear Sir, that what you have there is not a “true subscription” such that the name tagged person will always get new news on this thought. What you have is that the name tagged thought bubbles to the top of the news list until the tagee goes and looks at it.

If the tagee looks, but doesn’t like or comment on anything, his news item will just slide down and fall off the news list in a day or so.

And if you ask me, that’s a good thing. He gets to see it and then if he doesn’t want to participate, it goes away naturally … unless you repost the thought again sir! You can always do that if you want to really dig something in!

Si says
Okay. So in summary.
  1. If you fork a comment, only the new thought appears in the news. No new comments, even if name tagged, will appear to others.
  2. If you move other comments to the new forked thought, the owners of the comments will be subscribed as if they wrote the comments there.
  3. If you want others to look at the new forked thought explicitly, you should name tag them in the body of the thought or the thought title. (about title does not count … it is not scanned for tags).
  4. After an explicitly “thought name tagged person” looks at the thought, or after the news item is out of date range for the whole news list, the name tagging preferential top list status goes away and the news item falls off normally.
Sounds complex, but works really smoothly and naturally. The only thing you may ever need to know is that if you name tag someone in a comment of a thought they are not subscribed to … they will never see the name tagging. You have to draw people to your stuff in the thought and entice them to subscribe … and by these rules, it has to be you, the owner, who does the drawing.

Si says
Conversation forked to thought 21456

Si says

Mark de LA says
Then too the original comment can be deleted entirely & as I did rewritten with an improved context without all the graffiti.  nullthumbs up

Si says
Only if you own it @mark. Only those who own comments should be able to delete them. Other’s can only hide or move them. Now there is a hanging issue of sub-comments to a comment owned by you. SeriTD is still working on that part … and that is why these hiding and movement features are still in “good grace development mode” whereby we are expecting people to play nice in order to have access to the early features.  You must follow the 3 laws, even if the system has a way around them. Which basically boils down to not deleting or slandering things other people write no matter what it is and how much you like or don’t like it. If you move it somewhere else they can still get to, that’s okay.

Mark de LA says
I’m not worried about others thoughts, just my own.  That’s why I rail against graffiti. As long as I can delete the graffiti I’m good. I can always delete the main thought & resurrect it without any comments. 
Authorship is part of the being of authentic .

Si says
By the 3 laws, you cannot delete the main thought and resurrect it unless you first move content of others where they can still access it. You see, it is not your place to decide what that others write is important to them or not, only to you. Something they write in a comment on one of your thoughts may be super important to them and that is the only place it exists. Deleting things that contain other things are the remaining holes in the enforced 3 law system. Please don’t abuse that. Thanks!

Mark de LA says
You see, it is not your place to decide what that others write is important to them or not, only to you.
& likewise it is not your place to graffiti my thoughts & ruin their importance to me! null

Si says
I never graffiti your thoughts. I always put stuff that is related and relevant so that it cannot be graffiti. That’s the point of having open thoughts, to invite others. If you don’t want others to contribute, make it private.

The fact that you still think it is graffiti illustrates the whole reason for the 3 laws. I could write something inspired on one of your thoughts that clicks for me by reading what else is there and end up loosing it just because you don’t like it. That’s wrong, by any standard, and hence the 3 laws.

So please use the 3 laws on your own right now when considering what you do with the material others write. Thanks!  

Mark de LA says
OK – dude , “my stuff is good & you are just mistaken” is a tiresome response. The fact that you missed a lot of what I wrote in 21455 attests to the abuse of others’ thoughts with your comments. 

Si says
Do you believe that if something you wrote is not directly responded to that it means it was missed?

Seth says

Seth says
its unclear to me,  and sorry if i missed it,  but if a person comments or likes a comment on a though (forked or not), then they are subscibed to that thought …. no?   and if so, how deep into a thread does that still apply?

Mark de LA says
repurposing the word subscribe will help explain it all null

Si says
Yes and any depth. To the subscription service all comments are flat and all likes are just more comments (which they actually are). So any comment by you of any kind on a thought subscribes you to all activity on that thought.

In addition, a name tag to you on thought content will put the news item for that thought at the top of your news list and show you that you were tagged in it. This is actually not related to subscriptions, but works in concert with it nicely as Holmes discovers above.  

Si says
Not sure what that means @mark. To subscribe means to like or comment on something, just like at FB, and when subscribed to something, you will receive anything that happens on it as news items.

That’s all of it in a nutshell. The rest is only the particulars of what happens when comments are moved between thoughts and how do you get someone’s attention when they are not subscribed on their own. And now we know! (Thanks to @da aka Holmes) 

Mark de LA says

Paraphrasing: The quality of the response I get is the meaning of the thought you comment on. 

null

Mark de LA says
XOR https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=subscribe 

Si says
Yes, so going there, and then to Merriam Webster, I find our exact use listed as one meaning of subscribe.

c :  to enter one’s name for a publication or service;

When you subscribe to a thought, you are entering your name for publication and services that happen on that thought.

Seth says

Si says
This morning, the new name tagging system had some collisions with the SCAYT spell checker, and some of you are using that (That would be at least you Mark de LA). The collision now appears fixed, and was already fixed for those of you using nanospell.

 So have fun tagging people! You don’t even have to move your fingers off the keyboard … just type and go!

p.s. There are too few people registered here to see the collision detection and resolution in action … but it should be working well too!

 

Seth says

Mark de LA says
I use whatever the default is or maybe not.  What is the preferred?

Si says
I personally like nanospell, it has fewer quirks and cursor jumping issues … fewer oddities to deal with overall. But it doesn’t matter. I only pointed to that you were using it because I noticed the anomlie in one of your tags and tracked it down to your use of SCAYT … which allowed me to find a way to conditionally turn off SCAYT while in the middle of typing a name-tag … basically “calling out” that you helped solve that unknown issue.  

Mark de LA says
Well I use Windows 10 & only occasionally whatever Kindle uses. One feature about what I have now is that I can add words to the dictionary when it is new as I have spelled it. Does nanospell?

Si says
Nanospell does have a personal dictionary too. But both nanospell and scayt only store those dictionaries in your browser database so they don’t cross to other browsers or computers and can go away if you purge your browser data for security … so I don’t really use them … more trouble to use than just know my own words.  

Mark de LA says

Seth says
i have mine set on “no spell checker” and so apparently i am using just the one that comes with whatever browser i use. 

i did that to eliminate the cursor jumping … which to me is unacceptable.  but the cursor still jumps with no checker … so i don’t know.

i think cursor jumping should be totally eliminated in a distributed product along with the “watcH” bug.  and i don’t think the domain owner or the user should be presented with choices to purchace.  those options should never pop up.

Si says
Do you have spell checking at all? The whole reason for using nanospell or scayt is that html based editors like ckeditor (our rte) don’t work with the browser default spell checkers. Unless that has changed in the last few months, you should have no spell checking happening at all when you select “no spell checker”?

Seth says


yes a a spellcker pops up.  not a very good one but i use it all the time. 

 

Si says
I see that. It is a new development in ckeditor (info below). It is NOT the browser default one, it is yet another web based one … and fortunately does seem to work okay with the name-tagger.  That’s a relief! The other two were breaking the name-tagger on names that did not spell check out.

WebSpellChecker

This plugin brings spell checking in a dialog window into CKEditor.

WebSpellChecker is "installation-less", using the web services of WebSpellChecker.net.

Note: The out-of-the-box spell checking functionality is ad-supported. If you want to remove the ads, you can purchase a license here.


Si says
Now any of those will work with the name-tagger.  

Seth says

Si says
Okay Seth and Mark de LA.

Looks like webspellcheck was just a different version of Scayt … so I upgraded things and now you can use Nanospell or Scayt or None. Whichever you select seems to work fine in Chrome and FF and with name-tagging.

Scayt has more features but is much slower … the cursor jump around may have been fixed, not sure.

Nanospell has no jump around and is much faster, but sometimes unspells the first word in a sentence even if it is spelled correctly.

No spell check is just none now as it should be.

Seth says
hmmm …. “no spell checker” seems not to be popping up or looking for things to correct null

and notifications, like Navigator

anyway i’ll go try Nanospell now.  works, … er, but repositions the cursor to the bottom. 

Seth says
now i am in Nanospell …. and i will misspell a word  like receive ← wow that worked well, Navigator

no extra popup for WebShpellCheck.net null

Si says
In writing this plugin Seth, I worked out all the ins and outs, all the relevant details, of creating an intellisense plugin for ckeditor. This opens the door for any form of intellisense, be it additional tagging types, like #hash tags and !#bamtags, or even smarter writing of references that allow you to look up and select thoughts, tags, titles, etc. right inline while you are editing … the possibilities are endless now that I know all the steps in the technology.  

Seth says
null

typing something like # and having a selection list of tags to choose from or add a new one would be great … then it would not need to be a post thought operation.

Si says
Yes, I agree Seth … although it would not be # because that should be reserved to match the industry standard #hashtag which is a tag embedded in text, not a tag attached to something like thought tags … even though the resulting tag rooms and everything else would be similar … the idea of a tag embedded in text is still a very different kind of beast and could be anywhere in any text, not just attached to thoughts.

I am not going to implement one of these exactly now, so you have some time to think on what should precede a thought tag, if it is not to be simply [tag that invokes it.

Seth says
i don’t understand,  a tag is “the industry standard #hastag” … it should function identically to attaching it after the fact.  and tagging a thought in the comments is just fine.  many times the content of a comment dictates in which tag room it should appear. 

“[tag” would be ok too and would have the same effect.

Si says
I would want a #hashtag to reference that comment, because the “words” in the comment is what I was tagging, not only the thought, and perhaps not the thought at all. The thought tagging system does not allow that. #hashtags are more versatile, more comprehensive, than thought tags. Literally anything can be tagged with a #hashtag. Thought tags are a small subset of what industry standard #hashtags would be and the current system has no way to support the superstructure.

Think of it as that #hashtags tag a place, a context, in words, not an item of some kind. The tree, funneling down to that spot, would be stored, probably as a path … and thus any part of the path could be resolved as desired depending on how wide a view you wanted.

Once a more comprehensive #hashtag system is in place, then the current thought tags could be moved to it as a special, more limited, case of it though. The path would simply stop at the thought level. It can be done the other way around.  

Seth says
the question is the nature of the room you end up in when you click on the tag.  what is in it?   i have no problem with comments being in the room, but how would they show there?

the twitter #hashtag (“industry standard”) does not “funnel down to the space in the text” … rather any tag in a twit just tags the whole twit … and when you click on it you go to a tag room with all of those tagged twits.     I have no idea what your room would look like. 

Si says
Okay. Well having no idea is the beginning of amazing things coming in. That is your vortex calling to you.  

I know that when I write #noidea here in this comment, it’s about this comment and not about name tagging and subscriptions … and that is why I would want a #hashtag.  

And for !#bamtags that would be even more the case … they are usually specific to a sentence.

Seth says
well it would be a good idea if we could tag a comment, and then that comment end up in the same tag room with the thoughts so tagged. 

we want one unified tag room for each tag … #consciousness and consciousness are refering to the same context … the same tagrooms

Si says
Well, clearly it needs more imagination yet. We don’t need two way to tag that do exactly the same thing. And I sure want to tag things in context, which tagging on the thought does not do.

So from there, amazingness is grown.  

Seth says
well i totally agree that “We don’t need two way to tag that do exactly the same thing” smiley … that would dilute and disperse. 

tagging a thought does put the thought in context ← don’t know what you mean that it does not.

Mark de LA says
The tags are only as good as the search mechanism/display/reference needed to find & use them again. 

Si says
Tagging on a thought does not put a #hashtag in context where my words are. That’s what I want. Just like I can call you right here to my words by tagging Seth, I want to do that with #hashtags so that people can see a tag room where all my #iwantyoutolookhere tags are. Tagging a thought doesn’t do that and for thoughts that have 10’s to 100’s of comments, contextual tags on the thought are nearly unusable. 

Seth says
okay, so in the tag room where the #hashtags (tags same thing) appear, they can be highlighted. good idea null

Si says
Yep. For the moment I would say that a hashtag room would display the item it is in. If a thought, it will display the thought. If a comment, it will display the comment. And either way all the #hashtags should be highlighted. And you can always delve on the comments to see the thought if you wish.

Those would be the differences between a tag room and a hashtag room. Hashtag rooms would display only the specific item with the tag in it and the tag would be highlighted.

Si says
We could add name-tags as one of these embedded tag rooms. Then you could see all the comments or thoughts a person is tagged in. Mark will probably win the tag room trophy for that one!  

Seth says
but that breaks the idea that there is just one context that is being created by the tag.  i want to see the comments in the same room at the thoughts.  that is the whole point of tagging.

Si says
I have no idea what you are talking about. When I put #idontthinkso here, it has nothing to do with the thought. If I wanted to tag the thought, I would tag the thought. When I want to #callthatguyajerk then that is what I would do here and has nothing to do with the thought. They are completely different needs and mechanisms. You don’t need #hashtags for thoughts. There are already thought tags for that. We need #hashtags for any block of text we want to draw attention to and name. To me, they are very clear and different needs.

I don’t want to have to wade through a bunch of thought text when I am looking for all the places I #playidea at. I just want to see those ideas that the text talks about, right there with the tag, in context. The thought is probably not related, unless the tag is in the thought body.

Si says
One of the points of tagging is to simplify finding all or related of something. If you show the whole thought, then you didn’t simplify anything … you might as well search.

Seth says
you are talking about bam tags.  bam tags do not make tagrooms.   if you want to say, you don’t think so, just say it … ther is no significance beyond just saying that in some context.   If you want to see every place you said “i dont thinks so”, just search for it.   This is a totally different function than creating a tag room context. 

Si says
Bamtags go even further in that direction, yes, but I am not talking about them here. Look, you have never liked industry hashtags, you have said that before. They are not “your kind of tagging”.

But I do and many people do and what you are trying to do is bend #hashtags over to be what you like … and doing so would just make them useless for what I and other people would want them for.

We want them to tag sentences and text. Right now there is no way to do that. Comments are only loosely related to the main thought at best, and often not related at all. I want something that I can tag an idea, concept, or piece of information (like a phone number or a price or my random thought on free energy, etc) anywhere, in any text, with and get back to “that thing” directly. Hashtags are perfect for that … and that use has nothing to do with Bamtags, and is completely different from how you use thought tagging. There is a need for this kind of tagging … and no need for two ways to tag thoughts.

Si says
Think of a #hashtag as tagging “that sentence content” … probably not related to anything else … except other sentences with that same #hashtag. You would not use #hashtags to tag thoughts, use normal tags for that. Use a #hashtag when you want to tag and remember that sentence and it’s content, and especially when you want to get back right there … not wade though thoughts and other comments and things to find it. I have a huge need for that ability.

It is the same thing as a name-tag, but a unique label instead of a person’s name. You would use it for the same reason you would use someone’s name in a sentence … i.e. to call attention to that exact place … not the thought, that place. If I say Seth here, it is because I want your attention #sethhere, not on the thought. And a Hashtag tag room networks these #uniquelabeled spots … independently of the thought, unless the Hashtag is in the thought body. I want to see these networks of related spots and just those … that is a very important ability … and Mark de LA would probably want to see them graphed out as a true network … that would be cool too!

Si says
I suppose there could be an option, in any tag room, of including thought-tags and/or hash-tags. I might use that if I were looking in a thought tag room to also see related hash-tags … but I would defiantly want the ability to only look at hash-tags. That is the thing we don’t have that would be super useful, and super cool. null

Si says
Okay. Nevermind Seth. This is one of those things, something like number 8 in the list of things here, that I will never get traction on with you until you use it yourself … then you will go “omg, this is great” … so let’s not beat this horse. When it’s ready and right, and you have used it, whenever that happens, then we can talk about it.

Seth says
Well i don’t know where you got the idea that I “never liked industry hashtags”.  I  jumped on them way back when it was called folksonomy.   delicio.us implemented them back then and i used that a lot and that is where i saw their utility in being able to make connections and see a context in which people were talking.  I modeled my implimentation of tags and tag rooms after that industry standard.  Subsequently folksonomy tagging spread all over the blogisphere and finally got implmented at twitter where it really took off.

What i don’t like is the use of a tag to somehow highlight a comment about something.  Like saying #yourFullOfShit … that kind of tagging does not create any context at all … except perhaps the context of every time you bloviated to somboy that they were full of shit.

Now you on the other hand have never liked tagrooms … i say that because i rarely see you use them.  Yet you are enamored of these snarkey comments that people affix to text to be cute. 

Incidentally if you read way back to 2006 in the room (the context) folksonomy i doubt that you could then honestly still believe that i do not like  “industry standard tagging” … especially since i null it.

Si says
You iterated a number of reasons you don’t like #hashtags during our brainstorming of !#bamtags … and yes, your reason above was one of the reasons, and is why we came up with, bam-tags … as a solution to your adversary, mis-use of tags.

You had other reasons too, some that I remember are that they are not easily manageable at the tag level, like your thought-tags are (renaming, batching, etc), and that they have a weird syntax and the words are all smooshed together into one long word. You didn’t “like” any of these things. What you liked was the ability to tag things and how the industry was creating tag-rooms.

I still have not found any real use for thought-tag rooms. They don’t get me the information I am interested in no matter how much I use them. The only use I have found for them is historically browsing them for fun or casual interest.

I would have an extreme use for hash-tag only tag-rooms as I describe above. I would use the heck out of those and love them to death!  

Seth says
Yes i do not like bam tags … #hashtags misused.  Please get that straight. 

Si says

Si says
I totally get that. And that is why bam-tags should be a thing … so that people can have THAT ability who want it. And #markmywords … when you someday get to use bam-tags … you will get bitten by them … you actually already did for a bit in our chats while we were brainstorming them … and have forgotten that bitten feeling now.

But in any case, I get it … using thought-tags or hash-tags as bam-tags is your nemesis … no lack of clarity on that.  

Seth says
well tagroom are what make fastblogit really work for me.  and they even make it work for me communicating to others.  thoughts hang together in a context … they do not really stand on their own.  hopefully you will respect my creation here and not depreciate tagrooms.

i hate bam tags … and if i didn’t know that you were keen on them … i would ban them from fastblogit.

Si says
See my tag #markmywords there? That’s what I want. I want a real hash-tag, not a bam-tag, that I can put everywhere I say something that I know someone else will someday agree with even though they don’t right now. I don’t want that cluttered up with thought content. I just want that spot remembered in a room.

Si says
I have NEVER said I would do anything to thought-tags. I know they are part of your virtual-external brain and that is your business and I have kept them working for you exactly as you have designated, or asked very explicitly before changing them, as I did about switching ANDing to ORing.

I just don’t want #myhashtags, that I really need here, to be another way to create thought-tags. I don’t need another way to thought-tag, I need real hash-tags.  

And none of this has to do with bam-tags which are yet a 4th kind of tag and that #markmywords you will be bitten by someday no matter how much you may resist it right now.  

Seth says
ok, forget for a moment about bam tags – which are really just one off comments – they are almost never used again.

But if we have #hashtages and tags, then we have two things doing the same thing.  That is going to have the effect of dispersing or scattering … one will not know whether a though or comment was tagged or #hashtagged.  The good part of #hashtage (apart from just comments) is the context they create.  There is no other value that i can see. 

So implementing #hashtags will have the effect of depreciating tags.  

And we can well tag (or #hashtag, same thing) comments … then that just puts that comment in the context of the tagroom … and yes it should be highlighted.

Si says
Heck, I even “liked” your idea of creating the ability to “hang out in tag rooms” because that could make tag rooms at least a little more useful to me. You seem to have all these negaitive associations around anything that is not your precious thought-tags. Not that I don’t see where it comes from … I have seen how Mark seriously abuses thought-tags making them his personal bullying system. But please don’t let that confuse you about hash-tags and bam-tags. They will enhance the quality of YOUR desire for tag use by providing outlets and context for others so that they are not stuffing 3 different real needs into one thought-tag system.

Si says
Really? You want to keep beating this horse? For whatever reason, you won’t go into your mind palace and try these out. In fact, I am not even sure you have a mind palace. In all your talks about reality you keep saying that everything you experience, and base your understanding on, is through your senses. You don’t ever seem to base anything on, or try things out, in your mind palace.

So let’s just see how it goes. Let them come to your senses … where you can try them. Because all of what you say above is not the case. hash-tags expand and add value to existing tagging by creating a place for people to do things seperatly that right now they are trying to stuff into the one thought-tagging system. They will not dilute thought-tags, they will help thought-tags be more usable and pure.

Seth says
Forgetting about bam tags.  

You seem to continue to think that #hashtags and tags are not the very same thing.   But they are the same thing.  The only difference is what can be tagged and the implemenataion details.  

Yet you refer to the one as just “my precious though-tags” and you elevate the other as “industry standard”.  But they are the same bloody thing.

Except now we are contemplating adding the ability to tag (#hashtag) a comment itself.

Si says
I will drop “industry standard” … whatever, I don’t care about that.

After that, hash-tags are very different things. When I use #markmywords it is not for the same reason you use thought-tags. If you can’t see that, then just wait … I can’t show it to you without your senses having it available as input, and until it is made, they won’t.

Seth says
okay.   but then if this is not a #hashtag which creates a context room, then don’t call it a #hashtag … call it something entirely different.  I can see it as maybe giving a URL to a place in the text.  That is kind of different.  But if you confuse that with what is happening at twitter with truly used #hasthtags, then you will be just introducing confusing into people’s minds.

Si says
It won’t be confusing at all. Trust me. People will use these hash-tags exactly as they have been … and will even try to mis-use them the same way they have been unless bam-tags are there too as an outlet for that need. And they must create real rooms to meet the need I speak of and need myself … and those rooms must not always cross pollinate with thought-tags or they would be useless, although allowing thought-tag rooms to expand to include similar hash-tags when desired could be of use.

Si says
You see, you, Seth Russell, don’t use hash-tags the way others do. You use them the way you do. You have your own grocking of tags … and granted, it is very logical and organized and helpful to you. But how you use tags is not how others do … I don’t think you grock what they do at all. That is why you keep saying “they are the same thing”. You only see thought-tags (your way of tagging things) and you see something else people do that you put in the bam-tag category. But there is actually a middle category that is bigger than thought-tags or bam-tags that is how most people use all tagging, especially hash-tags.  

and p.s. this middle category is dirty and less logical … but it is what people do and is very very useful … and it is what would improve my ability to create and “think in” information dramatically.

Seth says
well i don’t know about all of that.  

i first noticed other people using tags to connect with other’s context at deliciou.us  … i did not make it up myself.  there were a lot of people talking about what this was doing for us.  maybe read some of those things early in my context of folksonomy or search for it at google circa 2004-2007.   you want this to be just my thingey … but it is not … that just makes it easier for you to imply that people do something different … er, without saying what that difference is.

incidentally you can implement tags (or #hashtags same thing) without needing a SQL table relating the thing and the tag.  you can do it just by composing a search result.   i actually think that is the way twitter does it.   One problem with doing it that way is that it become pretty much infeasible for a person to curate and correct tags to make them spelled correctly and coherent across the whole context to which they refer ← which is essential for making tags work really well for anybody’s purposes.

Si says
Exactly. The ability to manage tags was, and right there still is, one of your peevs against has- tags. I #listedthatabove. (and if we really had these things, I could go right back to exactly where I listed it and put (#listedthatabove) and they would be cross-connected. That’s something I would do with hash-tags that cannot be done so easily even with “comment level thought-like tags”.  

But as far as can’t, I can. I already wrote search and replace routines just like that for SQL so that I could re-index our references. They work just fine. And I can even get the author of a tag through a search by the author of a comment or thought. I would only make these tags a table for efficiency, so that they could be indexed and super quick … which someday may be very useful when there are millions of records and many more people.



 

Seth says
thing is being able to point out a place in text and go back there is quite differfent than folksonomy or what is happening at twitter. 

I am not sayint that is not useful … it may well be very useful.  But what it is not is folksonomy or tagging content.  It has a entirely different purpose. 

Si says
I agree that tagging first started nearly exactly as you even now use them. But that quickly changed as the masses of people got directly involved on Twitter and G+ and Facebook and threw the human factor into the equation with zest and gusto and the speed of the internet and the power of billions of people doing it, not from a logical perspective of having read what they are for, but from pure gut instinct of what they wanted to do with them. Now, hash-tags are quite a different thing than tagging of any kind started out to be. Now, they are more like a multi-way relational pointer with a whole bunch of other things (quala?) thrown in, as parts of the tag names, that are purely human in nature, not so logical, and without bam-tags, lots of emotional content as well.

Si says
Maybe that’s how things are at twitter, or maybe not. Maybe you don’t see or experience the additional dimensions at Twitter because you are not looking for them. Because you have tags well defined in your beliefs and the extra dimensions are outside your perception. Until you relate something to me that indicates you understand these extra dimensions … I would think it is simply that you are not seeing them.

Si says
… and, I get these ideas by directly watching Natalie, and Frankie, and Katrina, and many other avid hash-tag users from the younger (and young of mind) generations use them. They don’t use them the way you do. They use them to express a multiplicity of connecting ideas in one single hashed word that connect their thoughts with the thoughts of others in the flash of a single grocking. They speak in them, and they now even “think in them” … not the way you think in tags, but in a way that I must confess, I only recognize and have not yet mastered. Hash-tags are a whole new symbolic and always mutating, but still understood, language that is now being used by millions of people. They are no longer “just tags” or just “thinking in tags”, they are more like an actual pictograph language … but made of parts of our language so that they are understood instantly without having to learn the new squiggles like you would with Chinese etc.

#ThisIsGood ← see this tag I put on this paragrah Seth? It is not just a label. One thing it does is label the content here … making it easy to retrieve. But it goes way beyond that. The specific words express an entire idea about the nature of the content here and it’s relationship to many other things. In my circles, “this is good” is an Abraham phrase. And in my avid LOA life, just the words, separate from Abraham’s use, express a particular relationship between this content and how to focus thought toward what you want. Also, this tag stimulates a particular emotional response in me and others I know. My mind has learned to see it, not as just some words, but as a complete new word in itself that means a whole multiplicity of things beyond the 3 words in it or where it may be found tagging something. … and more dimensions that I am only beginning to understand yet. One thing I know is that because it is all one word, and not broken out as 3 words like thought-tagging would normally do, my mind sees it as a complete word, containing 3 words, but being a whole new word of it’s own … that quality is very important in a hash-tag. It is not just another thought-tag at the comment level. It is much much more. It is a whole new language too.

Si says
I have even heard Natalie call hash-tags “a form of poetry” … and she should know, she mastered in poetry in college.  

Si says
I know your mind will reduce and resolve and try to fit everything I said here back into the idea of “that’s how I understand tags” … but most of the difference will have been boiled off in that process. How do I know? Simply because you see hash-tags as the same thing thought-tags are but at the comment level. They are so much more than that … and unless you start from the idea that they could be so much more, you will always boil them away, back to what you know … because they are something new, something naturally evolved, and those kinds of things are hard to see by those who don’t believe in them, or are not looking.

Seth says

Seth says

Mark de LA says
So you dudes are making thotons anywhere in fastblogit linked together by #hash ?
 
I don't need no stinkin' big bangs nor black holes - cuz I hold existence as pure MAGIC!

Si says

Si says
Seems reasonable. You could think of a specific hash-tag as a marked spot and a hash-tag room as a thoton … would navigate like that yes.  

But as I say above, there is much more information coded into the hash-tag itself … it is literally a symbol in a new kind of language as well.

Mark de LA says

Seth says
perhaps.  

i think it is clear that tagrooms are different that bamtags.   i have only seen bamtags as use in the negative … have yet to see it done in a positive way.  the trick is going to see what happens when you click on a bamtag … that will be what makes the difference.

the use of bamtags should not take away from composing tagrooms.  it should be clear in the world which one should be used.

Si says

Si says
Yes, it should be easily clear too. You use a bam-tag when you want to express emotion … most people can tell that difference. And having a place to do that will clean up peoples use of hash-tags, making them more of a language as well as markers. Maybe bam-tags are simply the verbs in the language?

Mark de LA says
WTF is a bamtag?  Magic search has it behind a veil or words somewhere else. ?

Seth says
i can see composing a bamtag allows people to finally grock that they can make up their own terms … #HellYes … #ThatIsVeryKewl.   Me, i have been making up my own terms for quite a while … even thought moark always #Augs it … it is what i do … i am glad that others in the new age community have learned to do it too null

Si says
Bam-tags were brainstormed at floodles. There is nothing on the here that I know of. And I don’t really think we need to talk about them yet here … they will be an additional thing when they come and then we can talk about what they are as they evolve into existance.

Mark de LA says
& yet you are talking about them here for quite a few posts – null

Seth says
We invented the word, #BamTag to describe what you do when you tag a thought with some negative #Aug and i used to have to delete them.  To see some of your #BamTag s … just type into search “global” and see all the shit that pops up.

Si says
Well that’s a purely negative spin on !#bamtags Seth. They are much more than that and is why I don’t want to talk about them out of context like this.

Seth says

Seth says
i was describing them to mark so that he would know of what we talk.   you have discoverd a postitive aspect of them.   i can imagine it now.   can’t say that i see the positive aspects of it beyoned people starting to make up their own terms … which many people don’t normally do.

Si says
Let’s just say that if hash-tags are a language, then bam-tags are the verb-emotion-action component of the language and regular hash-tags are the rest of the language.

Seth says

Mark de LA says
XOR they might all just be labels .

Seth says
Mark de LA,  initially i have hated #bamtags … Navigator has discovered a positive aspect … and as you know has made it so that i can exclude your negative #augs  from emoting me myself.   like all the other things that SiriTd is helping this kind of dialogue go deeper.   Me, i would like to see where it goes. 

Si says
Well Mark de LA, I don’t try and reduce everything I come across back into what I already know. I sense something new here with hash-tags … I see people using them in new ways and even having entire conversations with almost just them. I even see people literally saying “hash-tag-what-the fuck”? and so forth in speech to each other. All of this indicates to me that there is something happening on this subject that is way more than “just labels”.  

Seth says

Seth says

Mark de LA says
Kewl – now that Godot has arrived am focusing elsewhere – got a huge nugget on consciousness this AM while making coffee. Enjoy! rosethumbs up

Seth says
and #yesMark … it is a label.  the question is what does labeling things like that do?

Si says
Here you go guys Seth and Mark de LA 
 

Seth says

Seth says
null  null … #DoesThisShitHelp

Si says
So anyway. All I am saying right now is that an option to add related hash-tags showing up in a regular tag room seems reasonable. But that clicking on a hash-tag itself is a continuation of a conversation that is going on and should show the rest of that conversation only … and probably even with lots of weighting and distinction about the conversation … maybe even as a hash-tag-cloud for that tag conversation.

Si says

Seth says
#hardForMeToImagine that untill i see it happening.

Si says
!#thatsexactlywhatIsaidabovesmileyface

Seth says
!#iknow

Si says
The final thing I will note here #assaidbefore, is that all we will ever have to do to “launch” Thinking Domains into the stratosphere, when it is ready, is just advertise bam-tags. Then, we better have good servers, for it will go viral. Bam-tags are super addictive … like tag heroine. 

Seth says
i doubt that.   people don’t put their focus here because they would be all alone with just me and mark and you to talk to.  they put there focus on their own blog which they build for themselves, or go to facebook where all their friends are.  some shiney new feature will not change that. #NotHappening

incidentally just this morning i got an idea about a different awakening of thinking domains … was getting ready to intoroduce that in a new context.

Si says
I think this particular shiny new feature will change that. All I will have to do is get a few of my friends to come and bam-tag with me for a bit. They will get soo instantly hooked they will tell a few of their friends who will come here to see #WhatAllThatIsAbout. It simply won’t stop. More than half of everyone who comes will get addicted and have to tell their friends to try it … and the “incentives” under the bam-tag clicks will keep people doing it even longer. #MarkMyWords  

Seth says
#okay … we will see what happens null

See Also

  1. Thought The art of doing with 289 viewings related by tag "ThisIsGood".
  2. Thought Interesting Pages on G+ with 215 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  3. Thought Wht is consciousness? with 170 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  4. Thought [title (21932)] with 138 viewings related by tag "aug".
  5. Thought Agreements are vunerable to lies with 126 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  6. Thought Glossary with 117 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  7. Thought Conversation on hash tags? with 111 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  8. Thought Why my trains of thought break ... with 110 viewings related by tag "hashtags".
  9. Thought I banished evil! with 110 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  10. Thought [title (24920)] with 109 viewings related by tag "ThisIsGood".
  11. Thought Wow! Words have meanings to others too! with 106 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  12. Thought about: How some Losers play the RWG - comment 67990 - comment 68201 with 92 viewings related by tag "HellYes".
  13. Thought Consciousness as "transactional relative relivance" reares it's ugly head for the first time here with 87 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  14. Thought about: Here is one for nathan - comment 75172 with 85 viewings related by tag "ThisIsGood".
  15. Thought [title (21770)] with 79 viewings related by tag "aug".
  16. Thought about: Kajabi - The Only Knowledge Commerce Platform Today with 78 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  17. Thought about: thought 23251 - comment 74736 with 62 viewings related by tag "thisisgood".
  18. Thought Conversation Rooms and Tag Clouds with 45 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  19. Thought Evidence of Schizophrenia ? with 45 viewings related by tag "aug".
  20. Thought about: Contemplation - comment 59735 with 43 viewings related by tag "ThisIsGood".
  21. Thought Clarifying how hashtag’s are defined with 41 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  22. Thought A recognition ... with 35 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  23. Thought Socrates Cafe July 12 2017 with 28 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  24. Thought about: Pure will is what makes plants grow - comment 76633 with 25 viewings related by tag "aug".
  25. Thought Reguarding Kialo - preserved just in case the FoHammer strikes. with 24 viewings related by tag "ThisIsGood".
  26. Thought Respect the matrix of others with 24 viewings related by tag "thisisgood".
  27. Thought Delayed Experience with 23 viewings related by tag "aug".
  28. Thought Consciousness Work with 23 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  29. Thought aug with 21 viewings related by tag "aug".
  30. Thought breathing as a method to effect will with 21 viewings related by tag "ThisIsGood".
  31. Thought Announcing Ability to Better Express Ourselves with 19 viewings related by tag "hashtags".
  32. Thought #HRCAlinsky with 16 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  33. Thought Fascinating Consciousness with 15 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  34. Thought Divided Souls in Consciousness with 15 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  35. Thought Conscience with 14 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  36. Thought A most Fascinating Conversation with 12 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  37. Thought about: Put the river in fastblogit - comment 60349 with 12 viewings related by tag "hashtags".
  38. Thought A Comment and Hashtag Dreampt ? with 12 viewings related by tag "hashtag".
  39. Thought One Person's Idea of Consciousness with 10 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  40. Thought Is nothing by an oobey feeling of death with 7 viewings related by tag "aug".
  41. Thought Contemplation with 7 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  42. Thought about: My Inside, My Soul, My Spirit - comment 59016 - comment 59030 with 6 viewings related by tag "ThisIsGood".
  43. Thought about: how to use parallel realities - shift into an alternate universe! - youtube with 5 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  44. Thought Esoteric Cosmology with 5 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  45. Thought Negativity with 4 viewings related by tag "aug".
  46. Thought #LOA-correctness with 4 viewings related by tag "aug".
  47. Thought Different types of Facts with 4 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  48. Thought Will of Consciousness with 4 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  49. Thought about: mark's inquiry on facebook with 4 viewings related by tag "consciousness".
  50. Thought Fall is a wasted on the city with 3 viewings related by tag "bamtags".