If we're only 25 years away from depletion of the natural resources, like the study referenced in the article says, and can't figure out a good way to harness this new source, then it sounds to me like we'd better start recapturing soon...

Looks like a Persian rug to me. Thanks!

Whoa. Mathematics is always amazing when it's made into art!

(Usually I would, just google it, but you took the time to explain it, so thanks, have a badge!)

Oh. I'm going to pretend I know what those words mean :P Looks awesome, anyhow, thanks!

This is cool! How are these generated, exactly? Something is telling me that's J code, but I'm not sure...

I think it's at least curteous to at least alert the host, so they have an idea of how many people they are responsible for, even if it's just a tap on the shoulder and understanding head nod as you sidle out the door. There's certainly no reason to go around saying goodby to everyone at the party, particularly if it's a large party and/or you're not particularly close with most of the guests. The tactic of "let one or two people know you're leaving" that seems to be popular heresounds like the best one to me, and is what I do in practce.

A whopping 60 people voted in this election. At that point, are parties really relevant? I'd think it's more of "I liked Alice's face more than Bob's, so I voted for Alice."

Similar yes, but I actually see a slight distinction be tween the two. To me, So it goes implies an outside observer describing the situation to a second outside observer. It seems as if the first observer is more knowledgable about the situation at hand and is imparting knowledge, changing the structure of their world.

Nothing to be done, on the other hand, seems to come from the mouth of an active participant; someone has tried, has given up, and is now describing her experience to a fellow compatriot. The compatriot might also be explaining her own experience; the two are interchangeable. There is a mutual agreement on the futility of any action, and yet they stil act, their actions changing nothing.

Of course, this is all highly subjective and incredibly dependent on your personal worldview, but this is how I interpret it.

Perhaps it is dependent on your personal worldview, but I am partial to Beckett's "Nothing to be done."

(I'm aware it was originally writen in French, but I think it's equally as powerful in English.)

Are they unequivocally the best way? Well, that implies that there even is a best way, which is a whole discussion in its own right. For now, though, we'll just consider the wheels. Are they an option? Yes, of course, and I think they should stay as such, even if some users don't find as much utility in them as in, say, tags. Like @humanodon intimated, users can cycle through the methods available to find what best works for them individually.

Whoa, neat! This is something that I haven't really seen anywhere else on a hubski-style platform (as opposed to a wiki), and I think it will definitely help foster group projects and collaboration on some things. I think a changelog would really encourage people to make full use out of it, but it's still a great feature nonetheless. Thanks!

Indeed, I often have to make a conscious effort not to construct an echo chamber, and I occasionally stumble upon a new user or tag and think "How am I not already following this?" The answer, of course, is that I was content in my own bubble and it became difficult to break out of.

Perhaps the feed shown to logged-out users needs (more) randomization? Maybe some sort of algorithm to ensure it shows posts from different "cliques" of users?

but that potential is based entirely upon the criteria for selection, which is up to each user. if you want homogenization (or don't consciously avoid it), that's what you'll get.

Precisely, it is up to each user to determine what he or she will follow. Because of hubski's decentralized nature, it would be hard to call the site as a whole an echo chamber because it's up to each user to make it not so.

"Groak" seems like the most useful one to me.

I think this happens fairly organically anyway, hubski is very active in terms of discussion. Concentrating it all might help, thoguh.

He's also being very careful not to oppose same-sex marriage itself, his line is that it should be refferred to a vote, which is proabbly a good strategy if he needs votes now but thinks public opinion will shift by 2016.

I feel like this will be our era's version of Stonehenge. Hundreds of arrows, all pointing vaguely-but-not-quite West, with no discernable explanation.

They're probably not going to ban you. They probably won't even respond to a pm. Your best bet to get in touch would probably be email, in which case they wouldn't know your username anyway.

Even if they did ban you, you could just make a new account. They're not IP bans or anything like that.

I am quite surprised! Like I said, I guess I'm just not used to a platform that encourages old threads because it values discussion so highly. It's quite a refreshing change, I must say. Thanks for changing my mind!

Wasn't aware that it did so, but hey, good to know. Thanks!

It appears I've been proven wrong! Thanks to you an others who've shown me a new way to enjoy hubski!

What you described as the comment icon showing you the most recent user to post is actually the user with the highest rated comment in that thread, not the most recent.

P.S. Also, check your settings :)

Well, learn something new every day! I certainly feel a bit moronic now...

Regarding dormant conversations, I figured this was the reason, but I never really understood it or saw it in action. I guess I just wasn't used to that culture of "revived threads can be good threads," forum etiquitte always taught me that dead threads are to stay dead and/or that reviving a thread will be unsuccessful. I suppose I'm still adjusting to hubski's more intimate, discussion-based nature. (And I'm quite liking it, I must say!) Although, I'm still weary of spending effort on something that there's a good chance won't be seen.

I do read the newsletter! The vault items never seem to have much new activity though.

Thanks for the response!

Whether or not anyone will see it should play no role in the decision making prior to making a comment.

On this, I have to respectfully disagree with you. I'm not inclined to spend time and effort on something nobody will see. To me, tagging others in a post always feels uncomfortably like standing 6 inches away from someone on public transportation and then spewing my commens in their face, but perhaps I'm just not used to it.

I am convinced, however, that the date function will push discussion towards newer posts, leading to an increasing rate of abaondonment of old posts.

Maybe it's that I'm just not used to the culture on hubski that's much more discussion-oriented than I'm used to and that does value old content as much as new content. I'll try to keep that in mind in the future.

I thought so, but the resurgence of this thread has seemed to show otherwise. It's had a number of comments int he last 12 hours, but is still sitting among other day-five posts on my feed.

I do agree with you that it might be useful in certain situations and certain types of posts (particularly ones which were originally centered around discussion). However, I often will see a post that I just have a reaction to that I'd like to share, but my comment is unlikely to be seen on an old post simply because few people are sharing it. I'm not saying it's completely taboo or always a bad idea, but I do think there are some situations where it's just not worth it.

Even just being able to know if there's currently an active discussion going on would be helpful; it's easier to jump into an existing conversation tahn it is to start one.

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly people jump immediately to hatred. This poor guy had absolutely no impact on the lives of the vast majority of commenters, yet they felt the need to immediately attack and scutinize him. So what if a guy's typing on a typewriter in a public park? Why do you care?

As someone who has some moderating experience on other online venues, you just completely changed my view of what is and should be considered spam. Thank you.

I wonder if this is to encourage some of the serendipity, so people don't just follow the top 10 mot popular tags and decide that's it. Wil them sorted alphabetically, you're forced to read (or at least skim) the list to find what's popular, making it more likely that you'll find something new.

I wonder how they would make it illegal? It's a truthful statement, it's not harming American national security, it's not slander and isn't inciting panic.

...I might still want to talk to a lawyer first though. It would suck to have the site shut down over something like that.

I always kind of assumed that they worded it in such a way to prevent you from indicating it in any way, specifically to avoid this loophole. They're not stupid, after all. But like the article says, forcing you to lie might get a bit tricky, legally speaking.

Anyway, assuming this is possible, how would one for each user work? You (an admin) simply click a button every day that updates the timestamp on all profiles, excepting the ones you were contacted about?

At this point, it might help raise the profile of both the tactic and the site a bit. Could be interesting to watch how the policy develops across other sites and institutions.