Idea for new sticky: Cass. sessions by date

Jack

Padawan Learner
Hello,

As a new user here I can see that the "Cassiopaean Session Transcripts" forum is a key center of the conversation. The topics refer to the dates of the sessions. The forum shows topics sorted by the most recently commented threads. How about a sticky thread at the top of the forum that would link to all sessions in chronological order, facilitating the ability to follow the discussion through time? (This would be especially useful to new users such as myself.)

Thanks,
Jack
 
As far as I know, sticky topics cannot be ordered by date. There is a mod though that does it but modifications are not easy to deal with and quite often create more problems than they solve. I would be hesitant to carry out a modification on a live forum with many users and heavy activity like this forum.
 
I didn't explain my idea well. What I meant was a sticky topic with a single post. That post would consist of a chronological order set of links to the topics for discussing the sessions. E.g., making up some dates:

(link) Session 1 Jan 2006 - links to the discussion thread for the Jan. 1, 2006 session
(link) Session 5 Feb 2006
(link) Session 23 Aug 2006
(link) Session 8 Mar 2007
etc.

As topics are added to discuss new sessions, that one post would be updated.
I'm not sure if I'm explaining this in a way that makes sense.
 
I think it's a great idea. You create it, I'll sticky it, and we'll just edit/add to it as the sessions go up.
 
Here's the new topic, Laura:
http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=13581.0

It would probably be a good idea for someone to proofread my posting of the dates. Proofreading dates is not one of my strong points.

I'm a bit shy about jumping into the Cass. session discussions themselves, as they seem to involve an ongoing discussion going way back. Is it OK for newcomers to add comments and questions about the session transcripts?
 
Okay I see what you meant. And yeah, sure go ahead and jump right in. Just make sure you read the entire thread or transcript so that you don't bring up issues that have been discussed before or brought up earlier in the thread.
 
Just make sure you read the entire thread or transcript so that you don't bring up issues that have been discussed before or brought up earlier in the thread.

Thanks for explaining that, will do.
 
Laura said:
I think it's a great idea. You create it, I'll sticky it, and we'll just edit/add to it as the sessions go up.

I can not express well how I am glad to read this Laura's post! :thup:
It seems Laura is the oldest but the most flexible (free from the formatory patterns or/and habits) person, here.

And Jack, thank you for your courage to ask! :thup:
I had a similar idea but did not ask because of a (small but) 'fear of refection' to my observation. :-[
 
GotoGo said:
I had a similar idea but did not ask because of a (small but) 'fear of refection' to my observation. :-[

Perhaps great minds think alike and next time it will be your turn to be brave!
 
Jack said:
Perhaps great minds think alike and next time it will be your turn to be brave!

Jack, I just sensed some 'hardness' in my emotional center by your line here. (Can be just my 'self-referencing' though...)
I hope I did not push your 'heroic program' or something. ;)

I value braveness but at the same time I value humbleness though. :-[

FWIW, good posts about 'self-referencing' are this and this by anart.
What I meant to say is that what I sensed might be just a result of having read your line by "coloring as if it was written by me". I don't have much interactions with you yet so I can not insert 'active reasoning' here so I am just wondering...
 
Jack, I just sensed some 'hardness' in my emotional center by your line here.

I was trying to make a joke. Perhaps I should have added a smiley face. I thought about it, but assumed that the context would be enough to show that my line was nothing more than silly.

Where I'm from, the line "great minds think alike" is a witty observation that can be made upon the discovery that more than one person had the same idea. The humorous implication is that the only reason for this is that the idea is so excellent that only the best minds could have figured it out. For two people to have the same idea must show that they are both top-notch thinkers. This leads to a chuckle in a somewhat wry, proud and casually self-deprecating way. It might be an artifact of my upbringing and social circles that doesn't have the same meaning for you. If my use of the idiom led to confusion rather than a chuckle, I apologize for that.

You'd commented on feeling less than confident about making your suggestion to Laura. I simply made the suggestion, not fearing that anyone would say no. I figured that a polite suggestion would probably not get me banned. Therefore, the worst case scenario was that my suggestion would be turned down and the forum would be no worse off than before I came along. It doesn't really seem like a bit of bravery for me. However, hoping it might cheer you up, I put in the quip about how it will be your turn to be brave next. That was also a bit ironic because I don't see my action as particularly brave, therefore there's not actually a reason to suppose you'd owe me a return favor of courage.

That is all I had in mind. I don't feel that what you wrote triggered any program in me. I don't feel that either my suggestion or your response had anything to do with heroism.

I don't know what you hardness in your own emotional center means to you, but I'm at a loss as to how such an uncomfortable sounding experience could have come about from what I wrote. My hope is that explaining my intentions helps bring about softening of whatever feels uncomfortable for you, if that's within my power and responsibility to help you with tonight.

I do appreciate that we have a forum where can investigate such matters and perhaps, both learn how to more efficiently exchange our intentions and meanings.

Nothing in this post is meant humorously or with any hidden meaning or attempt at humor, simply a goal to learn what could help me better communicate without misunderstanding.
 
Jack, thank you for clarification. :)
To be honest, I still feel the same in my emotional center (no offense though).
I guess I need to 'observe' more. ;)
 
Jack, thank you for clarification.

You're welcome. I'm glad to have found a forum where we can help each other observe and learn.

To be honest, I still feel the same in my emotional center (no offense though).

No offense taken. I don't understand that there's anything I could do to help with your observation at this time, and it seems to be something that's not directly caused by my earlier line. So I'll just wish you well and see you around the forum.
 
Back
Top Bottom