Hey all. Just putting it out there, that I find the journals difficult to read because of their stream of consciousness style and the lack of an easily spotted question or issue. I guess thats the whole point of a journal - a place to put your meandering thoughts without necessarily having a very specific agenda. But I tend not to read them much these days and I wonder if am alone?
To those who are getting something out of journalling, please continue. I think journals do have their place here. But you are writing here on a public forum, rather than privately with the intention of inviting feedback and discussion Iām guessing. So from time to time it might be good to think of creating a specific post in Actualism instead, if youād like to start more of conversation or need some specific input.
Yes I would agree and I have similar thoughts. I can see the use of journals for unloading whatever is going on but sometimes this makes it difficult to have a fruitful discussion around a key topic or theme.
Also when fruitful discussions do happen at sporadic points in the journals they are less visible to others as others might not be necessarily checking every journal entry incase there is anything to dig into in-between the meandering thoughts . I tend to try and read every entry but sometimes I will miss bits if I am busy etc.
So all in all maybe not the best style of posting for the type of discussions that might benefit us all the most. I actually tend to write the meandering thoughts either on paper if Iām relaxing or as a note in my computer and then I will post whenever something bigger/more significant has become apparent to me.
I am not saying stop the meandering thoughts though, maybe a little more focus on posting specific threads around a key theme might bring up the quality of discussions on here
No, you are not alone. I at least simply canāt read them all because many of them are, in addition to being unfocused -which is natural-, too long for my available time and willingness.
I see very positive that the diary entries spark interesting discussions, but it is true that they take away structure from the forum because over time they tend to mix a lot of topics under the name of one person, an also the journals (used like this) prevent the creation of new topics or the growth of pre-existing ones, dealing with those very topics in a unified way.
In fact, because of this Discourse has strengthened the search function, but of course itās not the same.
Maybe what should be done in the journals is to write (and respond by others) whatever is wanted, BUT before extending a discussion the journalist should search if the topic being touched already exists and continue the discussion there (and if it does not exist, create it)
.
But actually that is one of the traditional tasks of forum moderators (intervene/edit the posts of any topic and move them to pre-existing topic or create a new topic with them). I must admit that at least I was reluctant to intervene in the journals because of their nature.
Maybe, in addition to what the journalists themselves can do (moving part of their content themselves, searching first for existing topics, or directly creating new ones instead of writing everything in their journals), the staff should start experimenting by intervening in them.
We should see what the community thinks, but another problem is that it requires a lot of work from moderators because in that case they would be forced to read EVERYTHING.
Fair call. I think the way i could do that is to learn to spot when a topic is worth (or seems to be) general discussion and link it myself back to the journal section for later reference.
In my opinion the bar for creating a new topic should be lower. It doesnāt have to be a big discussion point. If you discover or experience something you might think someone else can get value from than that should be plenty justification for a new topic. Even if it gets no replies it will still be read by many and be available in the archives via search.
This is a new era of actualist discussion. An actual forum! With topics, organisation, opening posts (god, i missed saying āback to the OPā!, i am going to use it now!).
.
Back to the OP, i think that with minimal effort, one can sensibly keep a journal here, creating topics as they seem fit, and we can all get this tech pumping out quality, relevant, and āreal worldā demolishing content.
Speaking for myself, I have felt cautious sharing as a wider post out of a fear of āposting too muchā or that maybe no one would reply, thus āmaking me look lame.ā Perhaps others experience the same caution.
Just by naming those things I can see theyāre beliefs, not good reasons to avoid posting full topics.
Iāll continue doing my regular journal the way I am because really Iām writing that way for myself. But, when something really jumps out at me, or it gets a lot of replies, Iāll move it to its own topic.
Does anyone know a graceful way to do that? The best I have found is copy-pasting the comments, which has limited utility if there are multiple threaded replies.
Just do it in reverse, with a sense of it being good practice of sacrificing yourself.
No one ultimately gives a flying fuck about āyouā. (or āmeā or even anything at all - cue Fraudian āDeath Instinctā).
If something has struck you as an insight, something that changes things, something that fills in a blank, something interesting, then make a topic in the Actualism forum, and link back ti your journal for reference later, if you havenāt already managed to āselfā -immolate. In which case you will not give two hoots about your journal.
Either way. Letās sacrifice whatever kudos we think we get for the sake of being whatever-we- think we are when journaling/posting topics, for the goal of setting this world free in the way it clearly needs to be.
@Srinath, regarding the OP, the more you write, the better. Maybe, start topics that appeal to you.
