Brent_Allsop replied 14 years ago (Aug 15th 2009, 9:16:24 pm)
Yes, adding survey capabilities, and POV structure (critically important so people can focus on what they agree on, rather than their disagreements) definitely makes things much more complicated than a simple wiki. Thank you for taking the time to figure out what we have so far.
It sounds like you are quite literate with computers. This entire system is being developed in an open source way by volunteers. In addition any time spent on development by anyone, including making suggestions or pointing out problems is recognized equally with 'shares' of Canonizer LLC (see the [http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/4 topic on development compensation] for more info and disclaimers.) So feel free to make suggestions or help us make things better. There is still lots that can be done to this still early system.
Just a few comments about your contributions so far. And remember, this is just my POV, so if you want to do things differently - that is fine too. Our goal is to make the system what everyone wants it to be.
One goal is to have as few camps as possible - while still fully concisely capturing what all participators believe. We want to make it very easy for the lay person to learn exactly what most experts think - and the more camps there are - the more difficult this becomes. Currently, your beliefs are spread across 4 nested camps. Typically, the only reason to split a camp is if there are multiple people in a camp that disagree on a particular doctrine. I think it would be great if you combined all this into one concise camp. As more people join your camp, you will likely find disagreements, and at that time you can start 'forking' things to best represent what you all believe.
We don't yet have a way to delete camps, but you can recycle them by changing their name and parent camp as is done [http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/23/23 here]. (It's better to use a recycled camp than to create a new one since you get a lower camp id.)
Also, in your [http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/81/24 Mind Expert Camp], you've included more than just your name in the title. I would think such would be inappropriate because while someone may think you are a great expert, they may or may not support something like an Institute. I would think including information about something like this is perfectly appropriate in the camp statement - just not in the name.
Before your camp can be used by the 'mind experts' canonizer algorithm your nick name id must be linked to the camp. Your nick name id for Grey is 131. If you "Manage/Edit" your mind expert camp, there is a field where you can add this "Related Nick Name" id number. Once you make these modifications, let me know and I'll join your camp. Once there are more people than you in the camp, any modifications you make must be in review for one week before they go live - in case anyone objects to the modification. All changes made to unsupported camps go live instantly like Wikipedia.
Finally, you are currently only supporting your camp on this Mind Experts topic. As is described in the [http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/53/11 camp describing how the 'Mind Expert' algorithm currently works] anyone only supporting themselves is significantly punished in the amount of mind expert points they get. You can rank multiple people by supporting more than one 'camp' in a specified order. If you do this, even if you still rank yourself as the top expert, you will earn much more influence by the 'mind experts' scientific consensus algorithm.