#musicbrainz

yeah, I'm about to fan those flames.

good

Lousiana in the US?

i guess not US

where is the other one?

Nahwlins?

great city -- just about the only place in the US where you can drink in public.

No, its a museum close to Kopenhagen

ah.

ah ok :)

THey got mobiles of Calder. I love Calder

whatever

ruaok: Yes I read some of your links

I do not really believe in this cerebral stuff, but ok let's just take this 150 thig for granted

(I can think of some sociological reasons for this limit, that I prefer, but this is for another time)

g0llum: heh. Ong Bak is amusing. Thai Jacky Chan is what it makes me think of

I don't know if I so much beleive in the justificaiton for it, but I've seen a number of 150 limiting cases.

ok

DJKC: it looks so damn real. these guys are nuts :)

I'm still bummed we didn't get much time to hang out.

In a lot of respects you're the person I've been looking for. :-)

Someone who deeply understands humans AND musicbrainz.

thanks :-))

lets meet in bern.ch next time ;-)

you're welcome. :-)

g0llum: sounds good. I want to see Bern.

if you look at this graph http://radio.weblogs.com/0114726/images/Network...

ah eys.

the question to me is: how do we get the upper half working?

yes, even.

ruaok: donredman is da man :)

good question.

before we delve into that, I have one observations.

There can be mailing lists for the social networks degree, np

named, expertise in MB (and other F/OSS projects I suppose) is a powerlaw in itself.

hi!

there can even be small shortlived lists for the creeative networks degree

donredman: on one side you have VERY few people who understand everything about MB. Even I may not qualify for that anymore.

:-)

on the other end you have the loooooooooooooooong tail of people who have logged in and never came back.

so, our community has aspects of the powerlaw as well, which factors into this discussion.

donredman: OT, sorry: remember my naming AR suggestion?

well, I see the mapping that might work like this:

as I see it, mb-users was a boundary. It cut off the power law distribution at a certain point

creative networks: true beginners and people who just want to use the tagger

social networks: current mb-users

political networks: mb-experts

now MB has grown and the number of users to the left of the boundary is over 150: Problem. This cannot work as a social network anymore

um, I thnk you got this wrong

g0llum:you need more context for that.

ohh, tell me how I got that wrong.

true beginners and people who just want to use the tagger form a group of people

g0llum: you cant look at one and one album anylonger. bug or feature? http://g0llum.dyndns.org/artistpageredesign/sho...

the dynamics between them *cannot* be social network dynamics, because they are too many

g0llum: http://radio.weblogs.com/0114726/2003/02/12.html

You're totally right.

its inverted.

thus we need tools to shape their interaction so that the dynamics between them and the rest of MB is a political network with a power law

the wiki is such a tool

well the wiki, WikiDocs and google in combination

donredman: well said, hard to implement.

chocomo: its a mockup only, not a real mb_server

I know. I was wonderign if it was intentional or not ;)

but for the level of tagger users, the wiki is read-only and over their heads.

The voting system is such a tool, and you implemented it quite well :-)

its read-only effectively.

also yout top menu has lost its lines. :(

I did?

but the labums not have them, nice

well, who wrote the code?

So many people bitch about it, that I get the feeling its not too good.

Initially I did, but so many people bitch about it.

But the fact is that it works.

It is a political network and I belive it is scalable to the 100.000 of users

it has taken some time until i recognized you, mo :>

chocomo: nikki_ is asleep

:( sorry g0

aha, typical

But the mailing list (at least with the current social dynamics) is not. That is our problem

donredman: that was my original intent.

with 10,000 users it will work.

I canged my name to chocomo for her to giggle at and now she's asleep. aw well :)

unfortunatley it wasn't well suited for 10 users. :-)

ruaok: hehe

it doesnt work if there are too many submissions, thou

donredman: agreed.

g0llum: actually it does.

We have no write medium that is scalable for 100.000 users

does anyone

that is a medium where they can give input

?

does such a thing exist?

chocomo: are you kidding or are you in fact unsubscribign?

if so, why?

Amazon ratings, blog trackbacks, slashdot, our voting system...

it depends. will that make you sad/mad?

I feel this is very apropos for our current discussion.

these are *political* networks

surely only a small proportion of those users will actually want to contribute

ruaok: changes are applied after 7 days without anyone looking at it... not alarming, but it happens

chocomo: neither. I want to learn from your motiviations.

g0llum: its not perfect, but a few more tweaks and it could be adapted for a higher flow.

the system will be in constant flux over time.

that's just a fact of life with MB.

ruaok: it is juist to much text from me to effectivly take in over a day to day basis. so it sits in my inbox until the info gets stale anf all ireally can do is read & delete

inhouseuk: agreed.

chocomo: ok. I'm not surprised by that. This is the *exact* issue we;re attemping to address.

I just do not have a solution handy now :-(

also I feel I can safly do this as I'm here at the irc wher I get a more *inner core* feel of the thing

chocomo: thanks for giving donredman's arguments more weight

:-)

sneaky maybe. but much more calm . not aas stressy

donredman: neither do I.

ruaok: arent there some mailing list archivers which could provide a better interface

i googled a bit, but havent found anything just yet

:)

g0llum: i think that fiixng a symptom of a larger problem, without fixing the root.

I think once we address the root of the problem, we may very well fall back to such solutions.

Hmm, to be honest, we do not understand the problem yet

I'm afraid you're right.

at the same time, I feel like we're getting a lot closer to the heart of it.

can I say something?

pleasde

some other thoughs that I came up with last night:

the tagger users are different from editors.

I think.. that maybe what's the problem is that there is just to many users of varying interests and varying levels of knowlage that are crammed in one place. sould maybe. we split up mailinglists and make hem alot more *topic-spesific* and have maybe the peopel (stylecouncil?) look at their spesific mailinglist-interst

we should have some forums that cater to tagger users.

and others that cater to editors.

ruaok: yes.

we need some mechanism that enocourages the right people to move from the former to the latter.

again, not real clue how to do this, but its an issue.

I know some mechanisms