Curating My Long Term Trains of Thought

…  some context here re how #curating long term #TrainOfThought’s   is part of the purposes our TDs

but cutting to the chase …

There is a annoying problem currently as mentioned in “Deleting bookmarks ...”  so what thought #SeriTD lands on after a bookmark deletion needs to be changed in some manner anyway.

I propose the following …

null When a thought is deleted from the bookmarks,  #SeriTD should navigate to the next thought (or room) in the bookmark stack, set its group at attention, change that address to  the browser address, and adjust the title accordingly.   That would make the #curating of my long term trains of thought be fast and effective … not to mention using the bookmarks more effectively to keep my attention on my long term goals.

Another similar kind of change that is needed is that if your are in a room and send a thought there to the back room or delete it, then you shoud end up on the very next thought in that room.  This is another reason that i loose my trains of thought here in this thinking domain.
#bookmarks #curating

cc nathan


Okay. Useful ideas there. You should mentograph tag it usefully.  

In any case, as you probably noticed, all my available time is being spent right now on proliferation, not TD internals. When domains proliferate, and batch update, effortlessly (and we are nearly there … mainly waiting on the Bozonitron now) then I can go back to TD internals. I don’t want to work on internals while there are systems all over the place that need manual updating.

i thought i did “mentograph tag it usefully” null

What did i miss?

I don’t see any mentograph tags still. I only see hashtags. Hence, I cannot network off the mentograph.

like i said before … again and again … there is no difference.  you claim there is.  i claim for any practical purposes there is no difference. 

I looked at what you are asking for more carefully. That attention changes when a bookmark is deleted is something that must be fixed. It should not be happening. (nullnow fixed. The delete button handler was simply missing an e.preventDefault())
#SeriTD should never ever change attention unexpectedly. You are asking for sudden and unexpected things to happen to fit your own model of thinking. How you think is extremely different from how I think. My bookmarks have no sequential relationship to each other at all. If the thought I am looking at suddenly changes just because I notice and delete some old bookmark I am no longer using, I would be extremely annoyed at having to go find my thought again. The same goes for moving something to the back room. I don’t think like that. When I change the state of a thought, I am most often still working with that thought in it’s new state. There is no relation between what I am thinking and some random next thought in the group. I would forever have to be finding my thoughts I am thinking again and again just because #SeriTD sent me off somewhere else because I did something unrelated to changing where I am thinking.

The thought you are looking at should never change unless you do something that clearly selects another thought … and should never change to something totally random such as the next thing in an unorganized list or a randomly created next thought in a group. Such attempted automation would seriously confuse and confound nearly everyone except the one guy who happens to organize his thinking, lists, and newly created thoughts, in some personally relevant way. Like for instance, so apparently you only backroom a thought at the end of thinking it? I almost always backroom a thought first, then work with it. If backrooming a thought sends me elsewhere I would always be up shit creek without a paddle forever searching for those thoughts I thought I was thinking!

If you want features to help you think, then they need to be clear features that are easy to understand and expect by anyone, not built upon quirks in the existing system. And never ever should attention change unexpectedly by doing something seemingly unrelated to selecting attention … which is exactly what both of your feature requests do.

I can conceive of a next-under like feature being useful. Something like the “n” and “b” keys in CyberMind™. It could move you to the next thought in a list such as the last tag room you visited, or a search result, or possibly even your bookmarks if you happen to order them in some non-random way. But such a feature would need a clear way to be interacted with that is independent from actions that are not related to changing attention. 

okay the fix made it work 100% better … #thanks → nathan

We all think differently … i should not need to adapt to your way … or you adopt to my way.   When i curate my bookmarks i am focusing on changeing my long term attentions … i usually does not happen when i am focusing on some other specific thought.    When i am curating i must click on some thought in my stack to see what it is  so i know whether to delete it or bookmark it again to the top of the list.  #SeriTD could have done that for me,  it would not have been “an unexpected change”, she would have just done what i will need to do anyway the very next minute.

Maybe at some point that could be a mode one could go in. 

but no matter … works fine now … #kudos → nathan

Your welcome. But you are not “adapting to my way”. There is a well accepted industry design principal for UI’s that says “only change attention explicitly”. The only exception being when where attention is at now is deleted or removed. We follow that well accepted and well thought out guideline, that’s all. It is not “automated” to my desire at all.

Early systems, even early Windows, had lots of these idealized automated attention changers. It became hell for users and eventually designers agreed, don’t do that! No matter who such automation is nice for, there will always be more for which it is hell. *And* there is always a way to make a feature that will do what you want instead of adding automation to non-explict attention changing features.

What you are probably really refering to when you say “adapting to my way” is completely different things, like the admin user account. Those things are not related to automation of non-explicit actions. And quite frankly, not in your business.

well your “industry standard” way of doing things is just one way to do them … i don’t think we should adopt it as some kind of God here.   But In general i agree. 

There can be a connection between a thinking person and #SeriTD … usually the person leads … and he leads almost always.   But not letting her lead, where the person wants her to lead, should not be prohibited by some “industry standard” way of thinking.