klee.barada.nikto 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍🌈Jul 4, 2023
vga256

as some of you know, i'm writing a decentralized #foss reddit-like, not- #usenet server/web client called #tomo.

i'm at the stage where i need to make some decisions about how discussion groups are organized on the network, and i'd like your thoughts.

an open question for #fidoNet, #usenet and #reddit users of yore:

1. do you prefer nntp's hierarchical tree-style format for groups, e.g. alt.binaries.warez.ibm.pc.old, or reddit's flat organization of /r/mysubreddit? how about fidonet-style?

2. what's a reasonable character limit on group names? e.g. reddit enforces a 21 character limit on subreddit titles.

Jul 3, 2023 at 7:56pmWeb
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

by asking this question i've just realized that i've made a generational error:

those born < 1990, and who grew up with hierarchies like card catalogues, the dewey decimal system, MS-DOS, Usenet, and use nested folders for their data.

those born > 1990, who grew up with Google, and have a ~/My Documents/ folder with 19000 files.

Show threadThird spruce tree on the leftJul 3, 2023

@vga256 Its soooo true! My dropbox folder (ew My Documents is for game saves) has like seventeen layers of folder hierarchy. I dont know how you yungins can trust siri or cortana to keep track of your shit.

Im like Earnest Borgnine in the basement of Langley in R.E.D. i just know where everything is.

Show threadThird spruce tree on the leftJul 3, 2023
@vga256 At least were not those boomers who keep nine thousand files on their desktop.
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@tezoatlipoca yes, i'm the same way. my wife, who falls on the other side of the divide, enjoys her one huge folder of shit
Show threadMartin BeJul 3, 2023
@vga256 One more option: those who are using own brain vs. those who only brainlessly clicks/taps - Gugle, fuckbook, shitter generations.
The first ones can easily adapt to any choice you make. The second ones.. they will only whine, complain and cry, regardless of the option chosen. 🙃
Show threadBogusMeatFactoryJul 3, 2023

@MartinBe @vga256 Deep breaths.

The real reason deals for more with classification bias. If someone is looking for a topic, they are going to now have to navigate the bias of those in charge of the hierarchy. People classify things extraordinarily differently especially when it comes to hobbies and interests so for a lot of folks, they do not want to navigate a twisted web of logic that applies almost strictly to programmers.

TLDR: Hierarchy = programmers
Flat organization = Everyone else.

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@Bogusmeatfactory @MartinBe partly, yes. programmers do love data structures.

but ask yourself how enjoyable it is to find a recipe in that 10,000 document folder.

i think the solution in the end will probably involve strong search capabilities.

Show threadBogusMeatFactoryJul 3, 2023
@vga256 @MartinBe oh absolutely. Having strong search capabilities is just a great accessibility tool. There is no wrong choice in the end. I'll be happy with whatever is decided!
Show threadProfoundly NerdyJul 3, 2023
@vga256 You forgot about granny's desktop!
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@profoundlynerdy my granny's desktop existed only in a cabin built out of spruce, in the sub-arctic region of northern canada 😅
Show threadRhaedasJul 3, 2023

@vga256 You forget that there are those of us who were <1990 and understood the concept of organization, but also used floppy disks where you'd list the entire directory to find something. Convention was to name an empty file at the beginning with a space or ~ or something to show up first, then a name or description in the title for the disk contents.

Myself I prefer the flat version with the ability to quote/link replies as complex discussion can get out of control with a tree. I grew up with BBSes, never liked Usenet's raw structure, and thrived on the traditional forum looks such as phpBB. I got used to Reddit's style of trees and ranking movement, but very long threads got annoying to follow.

Show threadJohann-Tobias SchägJul 3, 2023
@vga256 neat.
Show threadleadedsolderJul 3, 2023
@vga256 I feel like both models can easily end up with duplication. Honestly I like the hierarchy since it could involve the provider's domain more naturally than copying a URL and pasting it into the search bar, which is what happens with KBin/Lemmy.
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@leadedsolder that's a good point. structured urls are sure a lot nicer to look at. can you tell me about how the kbin/lemmy approach works? i found their UX pretty daunting to be honest
Show threadleadedsolderJul 3, 2023
@vga256 I am not entirely sure if I’m doing it right, but to join a magazine hosted on another instance of kbin, you copy the url and put it into the search bar of your kbin instance - then you can subscribe to it. Similar to Mastodon
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@leadedsolder ahhh okay, that makes sense. i consider that to be one of the most frustrating parts of mastodon's UX!

i love that a dot.name is already kinda descriptive, and can be easily copied+pasted without urls

Show threadleadedsolderJul 3, 2023
@vga256 it reminds me a bit of the old email bang paths for UUCP..
Show threadBogusMeatFactoryJul 3, 2023
@vga256 I prefer the flat organization of things. That way I can search for one thing instead of having to dig deeper and deeper down the branches to find the group I'm looking for.
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@Bogusmeatfactory that is definitely a point in favour of flat. i never liked having to dig through usenet's baffling hierarchy to find anything useful.

would a search bar solve that problem? (e.g. type in a name, and have it show only hits of that name in the hierarchy)

Show threadBogusMeatFactoryJul 3, 2023
@vga256 Oh for sure! I see a positive of the tree hierarchy is if you could start at the end of a branch and work hour way up instead of the other way around so a search engine may be very helpful.
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@Bogusmeatfactory interesting UX idea! i hadn't thought of that before.
Show threadThird spruce tree on the leftJul 3, 2023

@vga256 1. Tree style. Reason is context. I can have a.bin.tv.b5 and a.discussion.tv.b5 and the purpose of each is explicit.

But newsgroups never put that to use. You should be able to follow or sub to an entire namespace not just the ends, like alt.discussion. tv gets you everything below. Like a multireddit.

But either is fine. Usisng my example youd have /r/b5discussion and /r/b5binaries

2. Dunno. Are the activitypub considerations like max hashtag lengths or lemmy comm names?

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@tezoatlipoca interesting points!

i don't think i've ever seen any discussion group reader take advantage of subscribing to the *entire* hierarchy 😆 that definitely creates some usability challenges, but i can see the benefit!

i hadn't even thought of activitypub - that's definitely going to be a consideration then.

Show threadMartin BeJul 3, 2023
@vga256 Nntp's style is okay and the names chars limit 20-30 will be fine I think.
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@MartinBe thanks!
Show threadMartin BeJul 3, 2023
@vga256 You're welcome 👍
Show threadDenez Van Dyck ⏚Jul 3, 2023

@vga256

If I've understood correctly, it should be possible to connect an nntp client to the #tomo server. In this case, the tree-style format would seem to be the obvious choice.

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@dvd yes, it is compatible with nntp clients. however, there is no technical requirement in any nntp client (as far as i know!) to use a hierarchy. it just reads the list of groups and splits it into the hierarchies based on their dot.name structure
Show threadDenez Van Dyck ⏚Jul 3, 2023

@vga256

OK. I probably misunderstood the question. 😉

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@dvd no worries! i'm just thinking about how information is best presented and kept usable for users. i remember the days when there were 10,000 usenet groups, and sifting through them for some obscure topic was difficult.
Show threadRachel StantzJul 3, 2023

@vga256

1. I’d prefer hierarchical names, but with a flat presentation. I don’t like drilling down through a tree UI, but the dots make it easier to visually parse.

2. 72 characters total, since it’s likely to appeal to the sort of people who want to read it in an 80x24 terminal.

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@arjache okay that's an interesting way of thinking about it. i'm trying to work out what that might look like, but it's giving me some ideas.

that's a *great* point re: terminal limits. i hadn't even considered that. can you school me on why 72 chars is preferable on an 80 char term?

Show threadRachel StantzJul 3, 2023

@vga256 by flat presentation I just meant, like, a list of group names. nothing too fancy!

for 72 characters: this is borrowed from git’s “50/72” rule. maybe 50 would be better? but basically, I assume you need to include room for things like indentation, label text like “To: ”, things like that. 8 characters seems like the bare minimum.

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@arjache ah okay, that's perfect. maybe a flat presentation *sorted* by dot.name would work.

ah haaaa... I didn't know that particular piece of UI knowledge! (err.. this also makes me realize how ugly my git commits are to anyone who reads them). thank you!

Show threadKilroy_Was_HereJul 3, 2023

@vga256

I always found the Usenet style easier and faster to navigate than the Reddit style.

IMO it's also more informative, tells you more about what the group is. With the Reddit style, something can be named differently from the group's purpose (or more often than not, be given a joke name that refers to some long-lost inside joke).

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@kilroy_was_here great point. they tend to be very descriptive and prescriptive.

i wonder if limiting the number of branches in the hierarchy would be of value?

i never liked massive ones like
rec.computer.games.ultima.dragons for instances - people inevitably would tire and give them acronyms like RCGUD, which was awful for visitors

Show threadKilroy_Was_HereJul 3, 2023

@vga256

I think you're setting yourself up for moderation hell by trying to limit them, people will just try to get around them.

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@kilroy_was_here it's hard to get around a hardcoded character limit :)

someone else mentioned a 72 character limit for the total hierarchy name, including the group name. i thought that was an interesting choice.

Show threadmoduluxJul 3, 2023

@vga256 I prefer the usenet-style hierarchical names, but then that may easily be habit rather than any better reason. Having a hierarchy presents the problem of having to choose what the top-level elements are, and who can create subnodes at each level.

As for character limit, I's say maybe 64 characters.

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@modulux the "enforce the TLD!" and big-8 cabal problem is exactly what i want to address with a different naming scheme. it was such a PITA for years getting new groups approved and argued over.

you're bang on with the character limit - @arjache suggested the git 50/72 char principle.

Show threadIl tuo cane • 🇺🇦Jul 3, 2023
@vga256 I would totally dig Fidonet style. Still missing my old 2:480/19.34 point.
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@antoszka 😆 i'm both envious of your beautiful node address and terrorized by my memory of them. i should have clarified in the post: i meant the echomail conference naming scheme :D
Show threadIl tuo cane • 🇺🇦Jul 4, 2023
@vga256 Yeah, I guess that's something I'd vote for too :)
Show threadEvan ProdromouJul 3, 2023

@vga256 You should definitely support the group federation FEP.

https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/1b12/fep-1b12.md

fep

Fediverse Enhancement Proposals

Codeberg.org
Show threadSven GeggusJul 3, 2023
@vga256 #usenet was never that strictly hierarchical.
In Germany we also have something like de.what.ever
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@giggls yes. so which do you prefer?
Show thread: j@fabrica:~/src;  Jul 4, 2023
@giggls @vga256 HOW DARE YOU BESMIRCH THE WILL OF THE BIG SEVEN
Show threadholothuroidJul 3, 2023

@vga256 Considering that r/sonicshowerthoughts frequently gets content about some hedgehog, some hierarchy for clarity wouldn't hurt I guess.

Some rules for sanity on the other might be good as well.

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023

@holothuroid sonic.showerthoughts
sonic.pillowtalk

this is beginning to make sense

edit: yes, name formatting rules are on the agenda too. i'm open to your thoughts!

Show threadDym SohinJul 3, 2023
@vga256 name should be long enough to fit a full onion domain
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@dym interesting idea. any notion of what the max name length is for .onion?
Show threadDym SohinJul 3, 2023
@vga256 currently 56, but i dont really see why limiting it to 255 would be any different
Show threadvga256Jul 4, 2023

@dym ah okay, thanks.

there has been some discussion about limiting total group name length to < 80, as this is a sensible limit for 80 column terminals which NNTP still supports.

Show threadTerence EdenJul 3, 2023

@vga256
It is nice having all the uk groups in one place. On reddit I could never remember if it was UKHobby or HobbyUK or HobbyUnitedKingdom etc.

Yes, all hierarchies break down eventually, and there's nothing stopping people from creating multiple similarly named things in multiple places. But we can at least *try* to add order to the chaos, no?

(And, yes, I am showing my 1990s Usenet bias.)

Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@Edent y'know, i really appreciated top level regional naming schemes too. thanks for the input!
Show threadAsHpersonJul 3, 2023
@vga256 the reddit style is cleaner imo.
Show threadvga256Jul 3, 2023
@AsHperson thanks!