Nice one TT! Collaboration, limited collectivism and sharing the load get my vote.
In my opinion GG is actually TW's strongest resource at the moment. *GG is a brain dump - a silo - anything and everything goes in it. *GG is the reliable silo. The entire conversation takes place here. Splinter discussion groups will splinter the conversation. IMO Avoid multiple silos. Open, unified discussion in a single established location is powerful, inclusive and democratic. *GG is the first, officially recognised point of call if you're a TW beginner. You can find answers here and ask questions. The community is courteous, diverse, helpful and very knowledgeable. *That idea of community has enormous value - the level of unforced user engagement on GG is extraordinary. *GG has limitations but in its favour it's still here, 24 hours a day, it's neutral - not subject to an individual's whims and styles, it is egoless, 'owned' by the group, not one individual. It has everything in it, there is a chronology. It's searchable - granted hitting the right search term is difficult but difficulty can be 'educational'. *GG has a personality - acquired from it's collective membership - it also quickly reveals who the TW 'adepts' are. You learn to trust inputs from particular names - (Don't stop sharing you lovely people). So, I like GG despite its faults. I think your emerging model of Official TW documentation, supplemented by GG as the big brain dump where everything goes, supplemented by super useful TW resource lists like Dave's Toolmap, supplemented by user generated 'area specific' solution wikis such as Mohammad's pioneering TW-Scripts and Regex Solutions is a pretty good model. Maybe it's the area specific solutions that could be collaborated on and extended? Mohammad has got the ball rolling already I think and did float an input tool for contributions of solutions found on GG. Perhaps he'd be willing to brush up the mechanism and users could discuss and agree on a formalised, recognised, findable accepted method of chipping in solutions around particular problematic topic areas? Some features I'd prefer; No single individual shoulders the burden Self maintainiing Easy input Topic defined Formally recognised and promoted Uses TW wherever possible Other things this thread might have ideas on; Structure of contribution Input method Collection point Agreed topic areas Method of publicising Collating those solution inputs would be the work that might need sharing and how to go about that could discussed further. The FAQ idea is another possible route, I think administering one, maintaining answers and establishing whose responsibility it would be need careful discussion. Avoiding multiple information silos and diluting the collective but anarchic authority of GG might be considerations. Anyway just my 2 cents, here's a simple 3 hit helpline hierarchy for any beginners out there; Tiddlywiki Official Docs - https://tiddlywiki.com/ --Google Groups -http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki ---- Dave Gifford's Toolmap - https://dynalist.io/d/zUP-nIWu2FFoXH-oM7L7d9DM see relevant sections Dave's already created a beautiful resource - so why reinvent that wheel? Adding area specific solutions to his toolmap, solution sites with examples, created along the lines explored by Mohammad seems like it could be coordinatable and doable. 'Lets Snowball that cumulative group knowledge'. Keep up the good work guys. Big thanks to all you TW-ites for your efforts and the continuing conversation. It is much appreciated! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/5661876e-8b06-4e56-9b47-02a05a8e9f2d%40googlegroups.com.
