Topics

moderated Categories for groups -- idea suggestion

Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

It would be very helpful to be able to search / browse groups by category.   There are new groups on Groups.io but it is not easy to find them for a specific interest area.  For example I'd like to see the new groups for "Amateur and Ham Radio" that are being formed.  See the illustration below, I don't think there is a good way to do this currently but it seem like it would not be difficult to add.

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ 
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

 

Jujube <ellaxyu@...>
 

Totally agree. Lots of other group host sites have categories. We'll have to decide on a list, though.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ" <@NN4ZZ
To: main@beta.groups.io
Date sent: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 09:48:07 -0700
Subject: [beta] Categories for groups -- idea suggestion

It would be very helpful to be able to search / browse groups by category.혻 혻There are new groups on Groups.io but it is not easy to find them for a specific interest area.혻 For example I'd like to see the new groups for "Amateur and Ham Radio" that are being formed.혻 See the illustration below, I don't think there is a good way to do this currently but it seem like it would not be difficult to add.

Regards,혻 Al / NN4ZZ혻
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

Chris Jones
 

Perhaps a topic for the GMF rather than this one, at least for now!

Regards,

Chris

Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Chris,
Wasn't sure where to post but just added it to GMF also.

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com

toki
 

On 04/01/2018 04:59 PM, Jujube wrote:

We'll have to decide on a list, though.
What is wrong with using either Dewey Decimal or LCC categories?

jonathon

Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Hi Jonathon,
The category lists I've seen are fairly short (maybe 20-30 entries) and broad or general.   I'm not familiar with the ones you mentioned but are they similar?  IMHO, I don't think we would want a very long list of narrow or specific categories to choose from.  If the list is fairly short it would be easy to view and select a category and even 20 entries would greatly improve the ability to search and browse in the area of your interest.


Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com


  

Duane
 

This was discussed about 3 years ago and there's an item on the TODO list for it, https://trello.com/c/oo1m94cl/122-tags-for-group-categorization-discovery

Duane

Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Hi Duane,
Thanks for that, I don't think I would have ever found it.   So the idea has been around for about 3 years and it sounds like it never got any traction.  Mark suggested that the Yahoo lists were too detailed and hard to find a category.  And that is exactly why I like  the idea of just having 20-30 broad categories.  That would accomplish several goals.
- make it easy to find one to assign to your groups
- make it easy to browse groups of interest instead of looking through essentially all categories like today. 
- limit the complexity and don't allow users to create their own cryptic categories that would defeat the purpose.

So that does means someone has to come up with a list of broad categories but I don't think it would really be that hard.  (famous last words, lol)

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com


 

Jujube <ellaxyu@...>
 

We could use the lists you mentioned. I didn't know of them, so I thought we might have to make up one, though it's always good to find some inspiration. My personal favourite is Yahoo Groups categorization because it's very specific, though we don't have to be nearly as fanciful. The nice thing with Yahoo categorization is that there's various levels of categorization. I'm not saying that we have to use Yahoo Groups categorization method. Even a few caffdhories would help a lot.

----- Original Message -----
From: "toki" <toki.kantoor@...
To: main@beta.groups.io
Date sent: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 17:38:03 +0000
Subject: Re: [beta] Categories for groups -- idea suggestion

On 04/01/2018 04:59 PM, Jujube wrote:

We'll have to decide on a list, though.

What is wrong with using either Dewey Decimal or LCC categories?

jonathon

Duane
 

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 11:06 am, Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ wrote:
never got any traction
I suspect it's been more of a priority type decision.  Now that there is more interest, maybe it will move up the list a bit.

Duane

Chris Jones
 

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 11:06 am, Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ wrote:
So that does means someone has to come up with a list of broad categories but I don't think it would really be that hard.  (famous last words, lol)
How about making a start on it yourself?

You suggested a list of about 20 or 30 broad categories; I wonder... if (say) 10 people were to do that without any collaberation between them how much overlap would there be, or would they finish up with 10 significantly different lists?

Another idea, although a rather "complicating" one  - would be the ability to apply geographic filters so that people searching for a specific interest in their own country might be able to find one without having to trawl through others on the other side of the globe.

Regards

Chris

PS: I loathe the term "ham radio" with a passion; amateur radio fine (I am one) but IMHO the expression "ham" serves to degrade our knowledge and experience.

Duane
 

There are a few topics about this, but the one at https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/193280 has links to a couple of the others, so serves as a good summary.

Duane

Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Hi Chris,
I also agree that Amateur Radio is a better term but Ham Radio is so widely used that I think it would be good to use both for searching purposes.  

Anyway I took a quick pass at making a short list limited to 20 items, sorted alphabetically.  And I included an "other" category for completeness and for those that prefer not to categorize.  I'm sure I missed a few but if Mark decides to pursue this idea, it probably wouldn't be hard to get more input and perhaps generalize or modify a few of the items to be more inclusive and sill keep the list short.

Regards,  Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com


Toby Kraft
 

My take on this is - I mostly agree with Mark's comment from 2014 - "In terms of categorizing groups, that opens a big can of worms. Perhaps instead, we could have group owners themselves create a set of tags for their groups. I'm much more a fan of bottom-up organizational structures than top-down taxonomies. They scale better and, I think, can be more accurate." 
And then he asks  "What do you think about this?" - so we're still discussing it.
Yahoo has 17 very broad categories - "Business & Finance, Computers & Internet, Cultures & Community, Entertainment & Arts, Family & Home, Games, Government & Politics, Health & Wellness, Hobbies & Crafts, Music, Recreation & Sports, Regional, Religion & Beliefs, Romance & Relationships, Schools & Education, Science, Adult" - the last one of which we can drop.
I would suggest each group have a category from the above list plus a set of tags/keywords to further refine the interests of the group.  The category can be used for filtering when searching for a group to set the "playing field" if you will.  (search for groups inside Family&Home with the following keywords...)
Thanks
Toby
PS I would resist having an "Other" category as it tends to become a catchall.

 

If the Dewey system were used all Mark would need to do to implement it would
be to add a field to the public list of groups to hold the code, and then sort
on it, leaving group owners/moderators to fill in the field as appropriate. A
list of codes could be on a publicly available database for reference. Two
digits would probably be plenty for this purpose.

Jim Fisher

On 1 Apr 2018 at 12:38, Jujube wrote:

We could use the lists you mentioned. I didn't know of them, so
I thought we might have to make up one, though it's always good
to find some inspiration. My personal favourite is Yahoo Groups
categorization because it's very specific, though we don't have
to be nearly as fanciful. The nice thing with Yahoo
categorization is that there's various levels of categorization.
I'm not saying that we have to use Yahoo Groups categorization
method. Even a few caffdhories would help a lot.

----- Original Message -----
From: "toki" <toki.kantoor@...
To: main@beta.groups.io
Date sent: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 17:38:03 +0000
Subject: Re: [beta] Categories for groups -- idea suggestion

On 04/01/2018 04:59 PM, Jujube wrote:

We'll have to decide on a list, though.

What is wrong with using either Dewey Decimal or LCC categories?

jonathon






--
http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom (needs updating)
http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy
http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not
Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you

 

For search purposes I find broad categories a good idea. At the moment it´s only possible to search alphabetically or by tag or name – if you know it.

Victoria

.
Yahoo has 17 very broad categories - "Business & Finance, Computers & Internet, Cultures & Community, Entertainment & Arts, Family & Home, Games, Government & Politics, Health & Wellness, Hobbies & Crafts, Music, Recreation & Sports, Regional, Religion & Beliefs, Romance & Relationships, Schools & Education, Science, Adult" - the last one of which we can drop.
I would suggest each group have a category from the above list plus a set of tags/keywords to further refine the interests of the group.  The category can be used for filtering when searching for a group to set the "playing field" if you will.  (search for groups inside Family&Home with the following keywords...)
Thanks
Toby
PS I would resist having an "Other" category as it tends to become a catchall.

Linda
 

Travel or Travel & Lifestyle or Travel & Leisure should be a top level category, not buried in Recreation & Sports.

Medical,
Health, Wellness is better for rare disease support groups.

Linda

Sharon Villines
 

I would suggest keywords. Maybe a narrow list of keywords. Will the search search descriptions?

I found Yahoo’s categories impossible and limiting— maybe it was just having to manipulate the hierarchy but I dreaded it. And often used a category that had nothing to do with anything just to pass that step.

Sharon

On Apr 2, 2018, at 1:56 PM, Jim Fisher <@jimella> wrote:

If the Dewey system were used all Mark would need to do to implement it would
be to add a field to the public list of groups to hold the code, and then sort
on it, leaving group owners/moderators to fill in the field as appropriate. A
list of codes could be on a publicly available database for reference. Two
digits would probably be plenty for this purpose.

Jim Fisher

On 1 Apr 2018 at 12:38, Jujube wrote:

We could use the lists you mentioned. I didn't know of them, so
I thought we might have to make up one, though it's always good
to find some inspiration. My personal favourite is Yahoo Groups
categorization because it's very specific, though we don't have
to be nearly as fanciful. The nice thing with Yahoo
categorization is that there's various levels of categorization.
I'm not saying that we have to use Yahoo Groups categorization
method. Even a few caffdhories would help a lot.

----- Original Message -----
From: "toki" <toki.kantoor@...
To: main@beta.groups.io
Date sent: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 17:38:03 +0000
Subject: Re: [beta] Categories for groups -- idea suggestion

On 04/01/2018 04:59 PM, Jujube wrote:

We'll have to decide on a list, though.

What is wrong with using either Dewey Decimal or LCC categories?

jonathon






--
http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom (needs updating)
http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy
http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not
Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you





Al Ludwick / NN4ZZ
 

Hi Sharon,
I agree on not liking Yahoo’s multilevel heirachy, it is confusing and too much duplication at the lower level.   That is why I suggested a short, broad, and single level of categories.   It would be easy to visualize all at once and make browsing more productive.   As an example, for browsing it could break up a thousand groups into shorter lists of maybe 30 to 100 groups per category.  The list of 20 Categories I suggested above is not perfect.  There have been some suggestions already to make a few of the entries broader and more inclusive while still keeping the list at around 20 entries.  

If Mark decides to implement this I think members could be asked to take a look and see if their group fits one of the categories or suggest how to modify one to be inclusive.  
I took a quick look through many of the groups here and it looked like they would align but more input could confirm or make them better.   And while continous updates to the list is not desirable modifications would be possible. 

Regards, Al 

John McLachlan
 

I'm warming to the idea of tags.

We get his this on FB a lot, which also has nested categories.  We put out model group under Hobby, and someone will suggest we change to Railroad, then someone else will suggest we go under Museum (open house and  all).   Same with the community garden.  Are we agriculture?  Or Community group?   

Keywords might allow more flexibility, as well as letting groups chose more than one keyword if they choose.