A modest proposal
With the Platform formerly know as Prince, I mean Twitter, heating up, we get a decent number of X posts (aka X links) on the board. Thanks to the .win coders (?), we can click on the subject, go to the post, see a preview of most of the content of the X post, all of it if it isn't too long, and even run a video or audio file from within GAW. It's pretty cool.
However, X posts aren't exactly news reports. Very often, they are simply opinion or interpretation. And even if they were news reports, from who?
Given that we can see the poster, the content, etc, once we click on the post, I would like to suggest that board pedes make it standard practice to NOT just copy/past the content of the X post as the subject line,but to ADD more Context.
Copy/Paste of the content of the X post as a subject line really gives the rest of us nothing to go on except that we click the post SUBJECT LINE to find out. The PURPOSE of the SUBJECT LINE is to inform the Board of what might be the content, value and relevance of the Post, so that Board members can choose: Should I click and look at this post, or ignore it?
Copy/paste of the X tweet in the subject line alone doesn't provide any serious context except: "This is an X post"
If you link to a twitter post, include in the subject line something like:
[Name of X Poster] : "blah, blah, blah (aka copy/past content of x post)
Or alternatively, give the name of the poster plus WHY it is significant in your view.
Of course, there are exceptions, but usually, more context is better.
NOT doing anything like tends to simply pepper the board with random X content, and means that the 1000s of board members who potentially could view your post HAVE no choice but to click on to FIND the context that makes it relevant, or just ignore it.
For Example, if an X link post to the board is:
"Trump is going to win by a landslide, but Ukraine needs to be won"
it might capture my attention. And I might click on the post, only to find out its posted by Dan Bongino, or Jack Posobiec. And, then, I might feel like I would NOT have clicked if I knew that.
Dan Bongino: "Trump is going to win by a landslide, but Ukraine needs to be won"
provides context and INFORMATION to the board. That small bit of information can translate to saved time or more effective and efficient use of time by board members.
E.g. If I think Bongino is worth my time, I can click on the post and check it out. OR, I can ignore it because the content might be interesting but I don't really think Bongino is worth my time.
In many cases, adding the Plus Alpha (your anon input) into a subject line makes things a lot smoother for the board as a whole.
It's ONLY a little effort on the part of the poster, but if you end up saving the board members even 10 seconds (if they do not want to invest time to find the poster/context), then multiple that 10 second by 500 and you have saved the board 1.5 man hours.
Post after post - 20 posts a day, and this all aggregates to a much more efficient and effective GAW.
The convenience of being able to make links themselves into posts and then copy/paste the content as the subject title is great. It's convenient and easy. But the question is, is this what defines high-quality, high effort posting?
GIVE board members more context.
Make it easier for them to make choices by taking a tiny bit more effort in how you Subject Line your posts. Particularly for random X posts, that are very often just some random person's opinion or view, and not necessarily fact.
Thus endeth the modest proposal.
Addendum; The same pertains to copy/pasting headlines into the Subject Line. Who's headline? Why significant? Read time? etc.
TL;DR: Add context to your Subject lines and/or put context in a comment below the post itself. Include sauce when possible.
kek. Nice TL:DR. You wrote exactly the same thing I did, except in 3% of the words.
But that's because it's a fundamental principle of mine to never write in 30 words what you can say with 300.....
Occupational hazard...
I share your disease.
[Meanwhile] People in my real life: "What the hell did you do all day!?!"
ππͺπ€£π
Haha this made me laugh. Definitely make sense that this is your view though. I'm the complete opposite. I struggle with long writings. So it's refreshing to see God use others in that way.
It was tongue in cheek, really. But I do think that there is something in a substantial description and articulation of ideas. For example, if I had simply written a post using Narg's TLDR, I don't think it would have half the impact.
That said, the capacity for brevity is also a gift!
I understand completely. I do the same thing often. π€π₯Έ
So true, and we love you for itπππ
kek
Weird. I thought I would be putting my own bias and context onto a post and wanted to steer away from that. So put our perspective and why weβre posting into the subject line?
Also try to use the original source content?
Perhaps it takes some practice, but I think one can usually provide context without necessarily editorializing. But also it will depend on the nature of the post.
If the post is primarily informative, then providing sauce, context it was published / presented, date, etc, these are neutral bits of info that help create context.
But a post might also be persuasive (in that it seeks to present a certain type of view - aka your view), and I think its fine to offer that as well, if you think its a) of benefit to the board and b) relevant to our work here.
In conclusion, if you want to post without injecting your own bias or opinion/view, I think you can still do that while providing more context for the reader.
Perhaps it is worth noting, however, that the mere act of posting is a creative act and therefor not completely devoid of some aspect of self-expression. What we post to the board says something about our own angle and view and thoughts re: the Great Awakening, nest ce pas?
Shroedingers cat basically.
Reasonable, it's even worse when people try to make things clickbaity.
Just provide some context.
πππ
I noticed someone else used one of your posts, to re-post - and I think it was stickied π€ͺ
So you mustβve done something right? ππ
Indeed. Also, I think its important to keep in mind that GAW operates on a 24 hour cycle but I think that few pedes will be present engaging with on board during all those 24 hours.
Many stickies also go one for 4 6 or 8 hours. Duplicates are an issue when they clog and disperse board attention, but a benefit when they are spaced enough to hit different groups of pedes ala night crew, day crew, now at work crew, etc.
Better the info is out than never having duplicates IMO. "This is an exhibition, not a competition. Please - no wagering."
Agreed 100%
Dat's what I'm toking 'bout.
Eggerzactly. The Shellenberger post stands out particularly.
<salutes Leftenant>
Welp, Iβm banned from X again. π€·πΌββοΈ I will not return to X. Itβs not worth the hassle anymore. Theyβre still trigger happy.
What did you say?
βNavalny probably deserved itβ
Hmm ... Thats a shame really. Wonder what they found issue with that ;)
Personally I think it would have been much more effective to share the hidden video of his underling making a deal with the CIA to create unrest in Russia and let people come to that conclusion on their own.
Even I have been scared to say this given how many folks do this and how frequently π
I am all for this!
Going further, if someone posts a X link, please try and find its original source and post it in the comments if the post itself does not have the source. Thats the least you can do, considering Elon is doing most of your work!
Good idea. I really like how people here demand the sauce. Always look back to where the information originally came from.
Oh my goodness!!! Thank you! Related to this was a thread I started last night but then decided not to post. I was literally begging people here to choose helpful, useful thread titles. For about the umpteenth time I was trying to find a thread that had been posted that day, but all the keywords I used turned up nothing.
Thread titles like,
You gotta see this!
I knew it!
What's this all about?
This is cool.
We're winning!
Etc. etc. etc. don't give any clue about the content of the thread. So when someone tries to reference that thread, they can't find it.
If, for instance, you are posting a thread about Stephen Miller, at the very least, have his name in the thread title. If you just put something like, "Trump advisor says such and such," it will probably neve be found again. Instead, something like, "Stephen Miller comes out punching about the 9-0 Supreme Court decision." That gives both his name and the reference to him speaking about the Supreme Court, and even the 9-0 decision. That's THREE possible ways someone can search to find the thread again.
I didn't post this last night because I've done it before in the past and it didn't seem to help. And I know this is long, but it seemed an example was necessary. I really hope for the sake of the sanity of all the frens here, posters will step up their thread naming game.
I agree, 100%. Being a person who saves all kinds of posts, it is infuriating trying to go back and look through them individually - because key words are not used!
This is a great example,
u/#Merica
Well articulated, and not really that long. Also, hang in there. Sometimes it feels like our efforts, pleas, exhortations etc don't make much if any difference, but ultimately, it's about building a culture, that takes time and layers and continual investment, until a certain threshold is achieved and things spill over into mainstream.
True for the Great Awakening, and true for GAW.
On that note, I think its important to recognize the difference between mods and participants. The mods curate, but it is participants who make the substance of what the board is. As such, its really up to the participants to pioneer and develop what the board is.
Just like in a healthy republic or nation, the govt must and will server, but the People must lead the way.
Thanks. I admit I was discouraged when I came back about an hour later and the first 15 or so threads in new had generic titles, lol. But as I said, I've been down this road before. And I'm sure not everybody agrees with my points, anyway.
Later I noticed that the titles were more specific and I thought, yay! Fractalizinglron's thread got through to some people. As you said, it takes time to build a culture and for things to go mainstream. WE of all people know that!
Agreed. Be concise and make your words count!
With great power comes great responsibility frens.
Remember, WE ARE THE NEWS NOW
Great idea. This site has become awesome for finding accurate information quickly.
DJT: "The best... is yet.... to come!!!"
Thanks fren. Somebody had to say it.
I've been guilty of it but I really try to keep it relevant and saucy.
I'll throw in my old gripe that people hate; If you put emojis in the title.... you've lost credibility and I don't look at it unless it's THAT alluring...
This along is updooogle-worth. All the best dishes come with saucy sauce!
I engage with GAW exclusively on my desktop computer, via a browser (Brave) and pretty much all emojis just come across as square boxes or occasionally as the indecipherable scrunched up blob where one would expect a recognizable letter to be.
And while diversity <kek> is our strength, I think that pedes who phone-post and phone-comment to GAW should realize that not everyone sees that stuff...
Thank you for this post! We all would appreciate more information in the subject lines. I often skip things because I donβt have any idea whatβs in it, and low effort postings are exasperating.
Original 'modest propsal' was meant as sarcasm, by Swift, which was that eating babies was the solution to our problems.
I did not know that.
ME <<< swimming in the residue of 20th century culture that permeates my brain despite often being set adrift from it's moorings.
Solid post fren. As always beautifully worded. Thanks. Appreciate you and all you to to help make this place special..love you
I really can't agree enough with this. Most problems in business + life seem to boil down to communication - politics too.
I always try to be as clear as possible, to the point where I might almost be pedantic, but I figure I'd rather ELI5, vs leave someone confused, or even worse; not even read what I'm writing because it's unintelligible jargon, scattered / disorganized, etc.
I very strongly encourage all my Frens to take a breath, take an extra minute to put yourself in the shoes of your listener & craft titles & posts carefully & descriptively.
Great job, OP & hope this is taken to heart by many!!
Hmmmm.... I think you could. Please agree enough! Even more!
/jks
Thank you for the comment and the feedback.
Indeed. If I were to drill down on this a bit more, I'd say that everything in life comes down to relationship (relationship w/ God, rel. w/ self, rel. w/ family, others, rel. with ancestors, decendents, rel. with society and community, rel. w/ environment, etc) and relationship requires and rides upon the saddle of communication.
Communication = purpose, meaning, form, and intent
YES - PLEASE - THANK YOU!
All day every day!
It is useful to cite the source (not just the site) in the post title, imho. I believe it is useful also to post the date/time in the title.
At the pace for moving at this point in time, yes, everything is pretty much βrecentβ
πππ
Interesting comment.
Note: this comment March 7, 1:44 pm, AEST, Sunny weather.