An extensible conversation should more easily allow a participant to invite a person who is in conversation elsewhere - 144 views

• 
  #1 Graham Perrin on 22 Nov 08

   

  Logically:
  
  if
  person B has responded to person A
  
  and if
  person A has responded to person B
  
  then
  there is (at least) a two-way conversation between (at least) those two individuals.
  
  Example: at http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/private-public-unread-bookmarks-for-research-7338 Natetronn Jackson and I fit the two criteria.
  
  Now: I wish to invite Nate to a conversation, but because he's not a friend, I can not do so.
  
  I might invite a friendship, or add to a list, or whatever - as a prerequisite to Nate joining the conversation.
  
  Better: where there exists an implicit relationship (in the example above, simple two-way conversation) between two individuals, it should be easier to extend conversations.
  
  I imagine a drag and drop action of some sort.
  
  Already the 'Voice' portlet does express those who are participating in a topic.
  
  I'm in no rush to review this topic, just seeding it while I think of it …
  
  Postscripts:
  
  * There may be a temptation to extend or complement the current 'Voice' portlet. However: considering the recent brainstorm and other discussions of widgets etc., I think it should be good for Diigo community and developer thoughts to coalesce before rushing to change any portlet. Key words: big picture.
  
  * For me, personally, the task of extending a conversation is the type of task that I'd place in my honeypot for later action.

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">Logically: <br /> <br /> if <br /> person B has responded to person A <br /> <br /> and if <br /> person A has responded to person B <br /> <br /> then <br /> there is (at least) a two-way conversation between (at least) those two individuals. <br /> <br /> Example: at <a href="http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/private-public-unread-bookmarks-for-research-7338" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/private-public-unread-bookmarks-for-research-7338</a> Natetronn Jackson and I fit the two criteria. <br /> <br /> Now: I wish to invite Nate to a conversation, but because he's not a friend, I can not do so. <br /> <br /> I might invite a friendship, or add to a list, or whatever - as a prerequisite to Nate joining the conversation. <br /> <br /> Better: where there exists an implicit relationship (in the example above, simple two-way conversation) between two individuals, it should be easier to extend conversations. <br /> <br /> I imagine a drag and drop action of some sort. <br /> <br /> Already the 'Voice' portlet does express those who are participating in a topic. <br /> <br /> I'm in no rush to review this topic, just seeding it while I think of it … <br /> <br /> Postscripts: <br /> <br /> * There may be a temptation to extend or complement the current 'Voice' portlet. However: considering the recent brainstorm and other discussions of widgets etc., I think it should be good for Diigo community and developer thoughts to coalesce before rushing to change any portlet. Key words: big picture. <br /> <br /> * For me, personally, the task of extending a conversation is the type of task that I'd place in my <a href="http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/next-phase-diigo-the-future-7336#19" rel="nofollow">honeypot</a> for later action.</div>

  ...

  Cancel

To Top