[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: The Problem with ListServs

Known, withknown.com is a light weight indieweb (read open source)
publishing platform. I play in a lot of indieweb spaces looking for
interstices with education.

It is more lightweight then a self-hosted wordpress install but united
around the principle we should control our own content and syndicate it out
to the world.

The reason for the metaphor goes back to an old marketing campaign and it
was a h/t to my grandfather (who loved the game). I think the add for
Othello was something like minutes to learn and a lifetime to master. Chess
as well takes a lifetime to master but has a much steeper learning curve.

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:37 PM Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:

> Yes, GregMcV, it is the pre-dog-eared version, which is likely the only
> way to associate dog's ears with whales that I know to date.
> Of course there are ways of storing one's own emails and then searching
> one's email client for XMCA content, however, this cannot include the store
> of content appearing before one started on the list.
> Furthermore, as I'd like to emphasize, this doesn't welcome newcomers, who
> may not know what to look for. Newcomers are not unintelligent folks who
> know nothing, they may not know the community and its rhythms, and they may
> not know what are established threads of thought that the community tends
> to congregate. Or for example what the controversies are.
> These are topics I've touched on when I first landed here, so forgive my
> repetitions.
> GregMcV, I was also wondering what is Known? is this equivalent to
> wordpress? Is it a kind of content management system? I didn't quite
> understand your analogy of chess vs othello.
> Kind regards,
> Annalisa
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> on behalf of Greg Mcverry <jgregmcverry@gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 3:18 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: The Problem with ListServs
> Annalisa,
> And a book about a whale using a language of the Web, that was funded
> openly by the Web, is only available in the dog eared version.
> I am not sure if Google Crawls and connects data of  searches using
> internal search engines. That is an interesting question.
> You can always tag material in your own inbox. Granted this is a solitary
> function and does not take advantage of the crowd.
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 5:11 PM Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:
> > My Gosh! $200 for a hardback about a sperm humpbacked whale!
> >
> > I think it does make an interesting presentation as a piecemeal work of
> > Digital Turks, even if you prefer the dog-eared version, don't you think,
> > mike?
> >
> > I'd like to offer that there is an awkwardness to using Google off the
> > LCHC homepage, in that it's not at the fingertips, but also Google is
> not a
> > private search engine (though it is a privately owned company), and so
> it's
> > not a preference for that reason (I use duckduckgo.com for my web
> > searching, for example).
> >
> > I'm not saying I refuse to search because of google on the LCHC homepage,
> > but I'm still remiss that there aren't kinds of ways of searching
> contents
> > that are organized in a curated presentation, and so dealing with the
> > search box at LCHC home, one must know what one is looking for before the
> > search. This doesn't really lend itself to being friendly to newcomers.
> >
> > I'm looking for ways to browse the contents of the XMCA that would be
> > likened to the ways in which I might browse a bookstore, following my
> nose.
> >
> > Browsing and non-searchbox access would also allow novel topics to be
> > saved or highlighted. Otherwise, those that might go off the beaten trail
> > can be lost due to the weeds of time growing over new, trailblazing
> topics.
> > The alternative is to commit them to memory, if one happened to be on the
> > list at the time the topic popped up. This is not an elegant failure.
> >
> > I'm all for elegant failures, you see!
> >
> > :)
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Annalisa
> >
> >
> >