Talk:MemeTank/Archive 1

From dKosopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

--Pyrrho 02:21, 13 Jun 2004 (PDT) That looks good.

I've used "Move this page" to replace the mock-double-level namespace address that was in use. The new title is a WP-style one. Here are some objections to the old name, Talk:Old:MemeTank.

  • I don't think you can create a novel namespace just by asking the server to put a page into it. I'm not sure what happens when you try, but I suspect if it doesn't match up with a namespace that the chief dKP software guru set up, it just turns into a long name in an existing namespace.
  • Even if you could, additional colons are not a way of creating some sort of sub-namespace. In fact, I don't think there are any relationships of subordination among name-spaces. I think what there is, is that the Wikipedia gurus, and probably the dKP one, decided to always set them up in pairs:
    •  : and Talk:
    • User: and User talk:
    • MediaWiki: and MediaWiki talk:
    • Wikipedia: and Wikipedia talk:
    • (in our case) dKosopedia: and dKosopedia talk:
    • and so on.
  • "Subpages" (what you indicate when you use a /-character in a page name) are a bad idea for articles. (They suggest a subsidiary relationship among topics, which can make sense in a paper doc, but not here: who says that the subject of transportation in Uzbekistan should be subordinate to Uzbekistan by being named Uzbekistan/Transportation? It could just as well be Transportation/Uzbekistan, and subordinate to Transportation. So name the article Transportation in Uzbekistan.) But they are often a good idea for talk pages, and especially so for archiving old talk.

--Iks(TkPg) 11:24, 20 Jun 2004 (PDT)

--Pyrrho 13:07, 21 Jun 2004 (PDT) Ikswazi, I don't mind the naming convention you moved the archive page too, but on the larger issue... what's wrong with using naming conventions that rely on the ":"... they are not namespaces but are mol equivalent to the user. This is a way to relate pages that are associated with the same project, e.g. searching for "MemeTank*" gives a list of pages by article title that are related to the MemeTank project. It could be any character, but the naming convention is similar to a namespace (e.g. MemeTank:Methodology is different from Methodology or VirtualTownHall:Methodology)... as far as I can see this doesn't provoke any sort of bug in the system... or does it?
-- Centerfielder 20:19, 21 Jun 2004 (PDT) The dKosopedia and dKosopedia talk namespaces were instantiated when I set up the wiki; I didn't knowingly do anything. So far as I can tell there's no interface to explicitly create other Namespaces. So far as I can tell, the Namespace name is hardcoded in the appropriate Language.pm file, and mapped to an integer which is then a field in a couple of tables, namely (no pun intended) cur.

--Pyrrho 22:17, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) Josh, I like a lot of the work (the details as always can take their time to resolve) but I think we have to get all first person references out of the page... first person comments really have to go on talk: imo. These doesn't mean removing the comment, just put it in another person, and people will edit it toward consensus.

-Joshyelon 11:58, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) I've vastly simplified the "Meme Development" section. There's just not enough data to warrant the complex organizational structure down there. We can change it if things pick up. I am still looking for a way to get more traffic into the Meme Development section.

--Pyrrho 12:45, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) I have considered putting the development stuff at the top... in fact I did this then didn't save the preview because I was not sure. Thing is... the development stuff is the goal, but what makes the MemeTank viable is correctly cataloging the memes that are out there. If someone is browsing the memetank, showing an accurate catalog is the best argument we can make to taking the meme develoment seriously. Another idea is separate the pages, but I don't like that. I like your latest idea of putting the development in the main reference table. But lets not do it at the bottom of that table, lets give it a column of it's own on the left. what do you think?
--bgod 13:07, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) My concern is if you blur the line between development and catalog you might get more newcomers accidentally sticking random meme ideas into the catalog again. I vote for keeping them separate and putting development at the top, but if I'm outnumbered that's cool ;)
--Joshyelon 14:25, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) I'm going to rearrange. I don't know what I'm going to do just yet. I'm going to try some different layouts. Suffice to say, it will be easily reversible if you don't like it.
-- Ok, I'm done. - Josh
-- That's definitely better! bgod

-Joshyelon 09:47, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) I've noticed that the meme development queue is getting little attention. I believe that this is because it is so far down on the page that nobody even knows it's there. This concerns me, because the only reason I'm here is that I believe we can make a difference in the real world of politics. I think that we can't make a difference unless we actively develop new ideas, instead of simply catalogging old ones. So I think it's really important that the development memes receive attention. I'd like to do something about it. At this point, I think the best solution is to integrate them back into the main table (in their own mini-section). At least that way, people will see them. I'm open to other suggestions, though.

I also note an ever-increasing number of memes in the main section that have blank pages. Most of them aren't worth filling in - they're half-baked random thoughts that somebody just scribbled down one day and never returned to. Many of them are paraphrases of other memes in the same section. I'd like to re-suggest my original idea that we should have a "idea seed" section where people can scribble their random thoughts. We can move all the memes with blank pages to the "idea seed" section.

--Pyrrho 12:45, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) josh, I'd suggest feeling free to clean such memes out. This is a think tank, not a repository of peoples ideas. If there is no page behind an identifier, I think we should feel free to delete them. Perhaps the very polite thing to do is move them to a "moribund" page with some appropriate MemeTank: name.



bgod 10:41, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT) I see them as two distinct but obviously related projects (Meme Development and Meme Catalog) with development being the primary goal, but the catalog being worthy. I think it makes sense to keep them apart - perhaps on two different pages linked from the main MemeTank page. Or at least I'd move development to the top and the catalog to the bottom. I also agree with the cleanup of the random thoughts - some are seeds, others are just as yet undocumented, but active memes. Gather them up and maybe we can vote on deleting some.

--Pyrrho 19:23, 4 Jun 2004 (PDT) this is really talk about the Template. One, I'd like the template to have meaning, and the meaning is to correlate the memes, which are of course by their nature diverse, into a set of things that are comparable and which can be combined in recipes to create rhetorical arguments, etc. It's not so much that I care if the memes cohere to the template at any given moment but more for the template to act as a set of standard sections that can be added to any given meme article.

That's just why I care :). So I've made another change to the template I want to bring to your attention. I changed the "Rebuttals" to "Counterpoints" which I saw in Bush Is Out Of Touch. That balances better with "Talking Points" and generally makes more sense in the context of these articles. (actually, I'm about to change it right now!)

--bgod 21:46, 4 Jun 2004 (PDT)__I like counterpoints better than rebuttals too. Someone somewhere suggested adding sightings to the template..I'm for that. And I just saw taxonomy - not sure exactly what that is yet - oh maybe where it fits in our meme tree? Another thought: it might be useful from an organizational perspective to at some point separate the "documented memes" from the "developed memes that we want to push". Maybe onto two different pages linked from the MemeTank main page?

--Joshyelon 13:20, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) Maybe jumbo is right. He has a point.

--Gryn 13:09, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) I already created the Liberal memes that backfire category, but I do understand the difficulty in striking a balance between overcategorization and the simple index. Categorization by bad/good and liberal/conservative quadrants is useful I think (although we shouldn't bother with good-conservative memes ;)). The neutral (neither good/bad liberal/conservative) memes are kinda wierd but I can't put my finger on it.

--Pyrrho 23:59, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) again, I abstain on the particular so far, but one thing to remember is that the template itself help address this, or can. That is... we can have standard section categories that include these sort of judgments too.

--Jumbo 12:57, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) I think you should keep the front page simple. Just make a note on the individual memes. We can't have categories for every concievable type and style of meme.

--Pyrrho 23:59, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) not passing judgement on if this should be a category or not (need time to think about it) but there is truth in what you say. There can always be extra indexes which sort memes different ways with respect to different criteria.

-Joshyelon 12:44, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) I absolutely agree. Go ahead and add another row to the table (eg, liberal memes that backfire). To get your name inserted automatically, type tilde tilde tilde tilde.

--Gryn 12:41, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) I think there should be another category along the lines of memes that liberals/democrats shouldn't use like Republicans Are Racist. It's useful to acknowledge they exist and perhaps to point out why it doesn't help the debate (gross overgeneralizations tend to lead to decaying discourse which works against progressives). PS: How do you get the user/timestamp signature inserted automagically for a comment? (I had to type mine in manually)

--Pyrrho 23:59, 2 Jun 2004 (PDT) four tildes, i.e. \~\~\~\~

--Pyrrho 17:47, 1 Jun 2004 (PDT) JohnLocke, why do you think that "Right Wing" is the correct term rather than "Conservative"?

--bgod [Wed Jun 2 07:16:43 PDT 2004] Hmm. Shouldn't it be either left-wing|right-wing OR liberal|conservative? Personally, I prefer liberal vs conservative. On a side note, where would we throw up memes that pit Kerry against Nader?

--Pyrrho 16:06, 1 Jun 2004 (PDT) that's the best reorganization this page needed! looks great. Thanks. Now I don't feel like I'm slacking. I still am, but to less detriment. I didn't look at the log, but whoever did it (I'm betting Jumbo), great work.

--Pyrrho 16:09, 1 Jun 2004 (PDT) yup! thanks jumbo that feels better. Good short description of what "Active" means.
--Pyrrho 17:02, 1 Jun 2004 (PDT) having said that there are still a lot of the memes in the active list that should be considered projects... I think we can feel free to move such to the appropriate category... if we "demote" such a meme, all it takes to bring it back is a few citations of it in the article, I'd say.

--bgod Tue Jun 1 11:48:32 PDT 2004 There's a dung heap of conservative memes at http://www.conservativebookclub.com/popPrint.asp?prod_cd=c6464 if anyone is interested in picking through it.


-Joshyelon 05:36, 31 May 2004 (PDT) Pipeline - yes, exactly. I think the layout you created (brainstorming/rough drafts/beta testing/stable) is perfect. (Although maybe "stable" will grow too much, maybe those should just go back into the encyclopedia of memes).

--Pyrrho 23:58, 30 May 2004 (PDT) Josh, I could and might try something (but I'm a bit busy at the moment) but I'd rather talk about it anyway. I'd like to see where we're coming from on this.

Pyrrho 01:48, 31 May 2004 (PDT) I'd like to collect memes while we create them and what I expect is that we will want to use the memes we identify inside the projects... memes are made of other memes. It sounds to me like you should organize the Meme Project side which is what you are talking about it seems. An organization that operates like a development pipeline from brainstorm to polished work...? yes? no?

-Joshyelon 23:49, 30 May 2004 (PDT) I'm not against splitting it in two. I have to go to bed, but feel free to resplit it. It should be easy, I think there were only six or so memes that properly fell into the latter category.

--Demosthenes 16:40, 9 Jun 2004 (PDT)I was thinking that we could [[[Google Bomb]] as an extension of the Memetank. Suggestions? Comments? Random words?

Retrieved from "http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Talk:MemeTank/Archive_1"
Personal tools