Talk:Topics: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(agree grouping topics is a good idea) |
(Notes about changes to main page) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* This sounse like a good idea, but I'm not sure how to do it. Perhaps it's something just to do and ask later. --[[User:G|G]] 12:28, 28 November 2008 (EST) | * This sounse like a good idea, but I'm not sure how to do it. Perhaps it's something just to do and ask later. --[[User:G|G]] 12:28, 28 November 2008 (EST) | ||
* Went ahead and organized it. Forgiveness, not permission. Plus, it kept me from studying for 15 minutes, and you can't put a price on procrastination. Feel free to reorg (natch), especially if you know something more about discourse theory than I do (= spending two minutes on Wikipedia). Topics could change categories according to the perspective people wish to bring to them (e.g. Google Book Search, which could easily be discussed as a social/economic tool, but the existing writeup made it sound like the author wanted to discuss it as a new legal issue instead). | |||
--[[User:Jgruensp|Jgruensp]] 14:28, 29 November 2008 (EST) | |||
Revision as of 14:30, 29 November 2008
Does anyone feel inclined to group the topics on this list? For instance I would like to list transparency in congressional voting records and other gov data: Sunlight Foundation, Govtrack.us, and others. Does it makes sense to group this topic under any general heading? Sethwoodworth 12:58, 24 November 2008 (EST)
- This sounse like a good idea, but I'm not sure how to do it. Perhaps it's something just to do and ask later. --G 12:28, 28 November 2008 (EST)
- Went ahead and organized it. Forgiveness, not permission. Plus, it kept me from studying for 15 minutes, and you can't put a price on procrastination. Feel free to reorg (natch), especially if you know something more about discourse theory than I do (= spending two minutes on Wikipedia). Topics could change categories according to the perspective people wish to bring to them (e.g. Google Book Search, which could easily be discussed as a social/economic tool, but the existing writeup made it sound like the author wanted to discuss it as a new legal issue instead).
--Jgruensp 14:28, 29 November 2008 (EST)