Today we have three modest changes to share:
1) We renamed the 'ignore' function to 'filter'.
In short, we feel that ‘ignore’ has negative connotations that misrepresent the purpose of the function. The intention of the function is to exclude posts from your feed based on the post’s domain, user, or tag. Of course, filter can be used to omit posts from users that you personally dislike; however, it can and should also be used to omit content that you are simply not interested in.
After much discussion, we agreed that there is not a perfect word that describes the filter function. However, we do feel that the name of the function had influenced its use, and the perception of its intent. For that reason, we have opted for a more neutral term.
2) We have removed the multiple editor function on posts. Simply put, users almost never added editors to their posts, and when a user did add editors, the editors did not use the function.
We feel there are ways that we can better support collaboration on Hubski, and it is a goal that we are actively working on (expect a post about this soon). However, multiple post editors didn't address a current need, and if we do revive the function, it will likely be in the context of another.
3) If you have created a personal tag, you can now see a count of the personal tags that you have created in your profile. This personal tag count links to a page with a summary of the personal tags that you have used. Personally, I had forgotten which personal tags I had created, and I am sure that I am not alone.
Of course, feedback is always appreciated.
On point number 3, I have a thought that I think I mentioned one other time but it didn't generate much discussion. I'll bring it up again just cuz I still sort of think it's a cool idea. Rather than me tagging my posts as #music.doesntgolf (and as #music), I think it'd make more sense for me to just tag my post as #music, and people who wanted to follow just doesntgolf's music posts can follow #music.doesntgolf. That way it's not so much creating a completely separate tag, but people could still only follow my posts in #music, if they don't want to see the rest. This could also have the benefit of extending to domains as well. So I could follow all of thenewgreen's posts tagged #thehumancondition in the npr.org domain. Or I could follow all posts from aeon.co with the tag #blah. And so on. It would allow for further user controls over what to follow. And I wouldn't have to tag my posts as both #askhubski and #askhubski@ (I believe that's how it currently works?). I'd love to hear others' opinions on this. EDIT: to put it more clearly -- we can follow any user, tag, or domain; I think we should also be able to follow any combination of these, rather than only the user/tag combination.
It's an interesting idea for sure. I am trying to think how it might be implemented in a way that wasn't confusing. For example, on a post that you tagged #music, there could be a link to follow #music.doesntgolf. Maybe #music/doesntgolf would be more intuitive? Or #doesntgolf/music? Perhaps personal tags would be follower-created only then. What of domains? doesntgolf/cnn.com? It's really a flipside of the filter/ignore function, in that sense.
Yeah, the toughest part would be in implementation and making it easy for people to follow the combinations. There would just be too many permutations of user/tags/domain to follow for every post (to have buttons in the upper right of story pages like there are now). The URL structure on the other hand, seems like it'd be pretty easy, just continue adding on the hub?id=doesntgolf &tag=music &domain=npr.org or whatever. Of course, I have no idea what sort of work it would tag on your end to implement that sort of URL structure.
I really want to think on the concept some. Sometimes these things illuminate unexpected possibilities. It is interesting how just flipping the specification from poster to follower has a psychological effect. It would be curious to see 'personal tags' of mine that I never created that are being followed. As it stands, we would have to wind things back before we could implement this in a way that didn't confuse the heck out of people.
Well, if people are following you and you start spamming into #music@, you're still going to be spamming their feeds right? At least to me, the @ addition creates a personal space where your shares are collected and can be viewed altogether, showcasing your personal whatevers, as opposed to throwing it on the current giant heap of shares in the same non-@ category. At least in my understanding it does not create a private flow of content where only followers of the @ tag can see it on their feed, i.e. it still counts as a public post. On the other hand with that aside, the @ allows you to literally create your own secure tag and not just a personal space apart from the big pile. For example, #vibesandjives@# is my #music@.
If I had it my way, you'd still have your personal space of #vibesandjives@nowaypablo, you just wouldn't have to tag it as such. It would live at a URL something like https://hubski.com/hub?id=nowaypablo&tagid=vibesandjives.On the other hand with that aside, the @ allows you to literally create your own secure tag and not just a personal space apart from the big pile. For example, #vibesandjives@# is my #music@.
This does exist. It just can't yet be followed as such: