Organizations as categories
Q: Which SJWs are associated with Twitter? A: Look in the Twitter category.
Organizations are interesting to this wiki because they are converged and have SJWs associated with them. The MediaWiki category system allows us to maintain this kind of data easily.
This is a much easier decision than events, because the definition of an organization is literally a category of people.
Events as categories
Hi Peppermint, I agree with you about the events being in categories. I thought it had been decided somewhere to not do that. A couple guys were talking about making them very high over view things like software development, etc. IMO, you can keep the software development category, and also have a DongleGate category.
I wouldn't mind putting them back in as categories, i actually prefer it.
Hi Peppermint, responding to this :
The profession categories Academia and Journalism were for recording which persons were academics or journalists, because those fields are so important to SJWs structurally. Then someone wanted a Software Development profession category, and added it. I don't think it's really useful to know which SJWs are in that field, but whatever.
Were you saying events should be put in profession categories? That would mean we couldn't count the number of people in each category easily for statistics. What would be the benefit? When we get enough events, it might be nice to categorize them into no platforming, firing, crime hoaxing, etc, but isn't as important as categorizing persons, since if the SJWs come and hoax an event, they could only sue the wiki based on messing with person pages to add them to the event anyway.
psst- i know about the admin chat but i don't want to use any of my accounts to log in there. lee posted to me about it then deleted it so a casual onlooker wouldn't find it.
This whole topic bugs me because I think maybe a bunch of people are doing stuff, and I thought it was agreed upon.
Here is what I understand is happening - maybe a couple guys decided to make categories be these broad type categories, such as software development. That would include the lambdaconf, baldurs gate, twitter, facebook, github, socialautopsy.com , etc. But each of those are also their own individual event.
I noted that someone had created an events area, so I moved a couple my smaller ones into that and removed them as category. I much prefer them as a category.
My thought is - lets have that Software Development category. But lets also have the Lambdaconf category. The hardest part here will be to include the category tag for both under the page. That's not bad at all.
In one of these things you mentioned the data entry nightmares of doing things the way I did these last couple. I agree. Look at SocialAutopsy.com, which has something like 30 names and the converged organization. Who wants to key in and keep up with all of those links? Not when the category does it automatically.
The professional category thing, I didn't come up with it. But I understand it. For instance, I put in the Science one, which would include Sir Tim Hunt, Shirtgate, etc. Things that happened within that industry. I believe the idea is something like a person in the science industry may not care about the publishing and authors industry. So it lets them see an overview of their particular industy.
Anyway, I was ok with the category for an event, and category for the industry. Originally I had the baldurs gate have a category: baldur's gategate and software development.
Your question about adding an event in a category would go away, as that event would now also be a category of it's own.
So, in a nutshell, I think the event, as well as the over all industry or whatever we want to call it, can coexist as categories. I was actually doing that originally until I thought they wanted the other way.