The only way to get to know a person is to interact with a person. I invite you to do just that...
If you're looking for serious definitions of anything,
If you're looking for a definition of everything,
here is the answer.
Some of my (imho) most worthwhile writeups: Rudiger Safranski, The Royal Rolemodel, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, The Netherlands, Libertarian Party, Recipe: Carrot Salad, Stubbornness, All rights reserved, self esteem, etc.
Okay ... now I need the time to start on my next node. It's probably gonna be about the Extensible and Executable Web or about the latest book I will just have finished reading at that rare moment I will have the time to actually do some quality noding (like Soberty does so amazingly well).
Taken from elsewhere ... I'll just save it here for a little while.
This is something I noticed about myself : since I have been promoted to level 2, I want to know more about the killer nodes. Those without which everything would not be E2. Those you will find soft linked to any other node, especially if there is no connection. Nodes like How I nearly killed myself masturbating or Don't force your gay philosophy on me. Flamewars or just plain good nodes.
What I then tend to do, especially if it was cooled, is to vote the writeup up or down fter speed reading it, Just for the sake of knowing what it's reputation is. What I then see is huge. +250, +150, -62. Numbers I can only dream of, me and my maximum of 19.
Waht did those guys do to deserve so many votes ? Is it really solely because their writeups rule/suck, or did they also take the time to visit every possible node and soft link them to their nodes ? Or do I myself only see these soft links more often because they are already soft linked in my head, like a kind of obsession, and I only surf to subjects nearly or farly connected (soft linked) to those nodes ? Another possibility is that there's a kind a Godwin's Law of everything, stating that
sooner or later, a node will be soft liked to How I nearly killed myself masturbating
I admit my sin, I am spilling my vote on the dusty ground, just because I want to know how those writeups rated. I could give ALL my votes to a newbie in desperate need of votes, but can't, because too curious.
One could take voters for the intelligent people they are, and not hide the wu's reputation. This wouldn't force the people to vote for a popular node, as there is no incitant.
One could implement a Vote Cap, making voting impossible after, say, 100 votes. This would protect people who write just one bad node and lose all reputation, and do the same against people who build up a whole reputation on a few writeups.
I used to have a mentor that was not really on E2 a lot. Now Wonko gave me a new mentor. Here is his very cool and elaborate email ... if I could cool I would cool it ! Hi there,
I'm your new mentor. Feel free to ask me any questions. Right now I'm really busy with university, but hopefully I'll be able to give you a lot more of my time in a few weeks.
About me - there's a wee bit of information on my homenode. My career as a noder hasn't exactly been prolific and I plan on going over all my old writeups and updating / fixing / killing them, as I'm not terribly happy with them. I have noded a lot of lyrics so far, which can be a delicate issue sometimes...
I didn't really answer the "about me"... err, I'm final year computing science student. I live somewhere in Northern Ireland. I like music and play guitar and bass...
Okay that's enough about me!
I haven't had a chance to read any of your writeups yet, but I will do when I get time. If you want to read any of mine, do it by positive reputation or you'll just end up with lyrics =)
As for the questions posed on your homenode:
The nodes in question are older nodes. The longer a node is around, the greater the chance that someone will vote on it. They are also nodes which have been linked EVERYWHERE, and so this increases their chance of being stumbled upon. Aside from that, they are generally well written, very funny or controversial nodes that you've noticed. This makes more people see them, and so, vote on them.
As for vote capping... If someone writes an excellent writeup, they deserve the reputation and/or XP they get from that. Capping at, say, 100 votes doesn't make any sense. People's votes should count towards something, and not be dependant upon how many people voted on it before them. As for the highly negative writeups, they are bound to be killed long before they reach that stage. Writeups below -5 generally don't stick around very long.
Anyway, I must get going now, I have a lot of work to do this weekend. Feel free to email or msg me anytime. I respond to email a lot quicker though :) By the way, your KeyID is not on the keyserver that I'm using - perhaps you could upload it and let it propagate?
Thanks! I hope you have fun on E2! Write back soon.
I recently had the courage for a Node Heaven Visitation. I was amazed at what I saw there ... I wish there was also a Node Hell, cuz some nodes I NEVER wanna see again and some should really be "in heaven" ! Here's a nice sample (with a very cool reputation):
I will REMOVE the fucking toilet seat if you don't shut up (idea)
I started out with my personal story about toilet seats ... it went as follows:
OK, this is probably the weirdest but coolest topic. Great that there are actually people who can say something useful about this not so unimportant subject (yeah, I heared them singing the song 'n stuff).
Guys, here's a simple solution for if the seat is clean that is ... stand before and facing the toilet and than sit down. Although this is a weird way to sit on a toilet, you can actually see the cool stuff some people put on their toilets (esp. in Western Europe). Added advantages are: less straign on trying to get as close to the bowl as possible and you're close enough to not miss at all !
Girls love it, cuz now the seat stays clean and down.
Might I note that I lived with many girls for a long time and ever since I had this discussion with my mom (who taught me this little trick) I have not heard any complaints.
Yes, we all know the foolishness of the whole issue, but it can break the best of relationships (at least it seems like it). Behold the future ... someone will invent a whole new toilet !
When it got downvoted like crazy and people did not tell me why I decided to write the following:
Post removed due to my inability to post something usefull. Or in other words: something that is not being voted down like crazy.
But that did not really work either (excuse me, but I "was" still a newbie when I posted this story). So here it is back by popular demand ... [Sir PK's ranting about toilet seats: ...wait a few years and something new has been invented...
PS: Can someone tell me why Klaproth ate it ???
*** De vijf Paradoxen van Leiderschap
Bron: Elan, magazine voor directeuren en commissarissen. Een uitgave van uitgeverij Kluwer in samenwerking met het Nederlands Centrum van Directeuren en Commissarissen.
Het omarmen van paradoxen is een sleutelfactor voor leiderschap in complexe en onzekere tijden.
Snel EN zorgvuldig: hoe vind je een balans tussen efficiënt en verstandig reageren enerzijds en nieuwe ideeën en innovatie anderzijds ?
Individu EN gemeenschap: de technologie verschaft medewerkers een grote mate van autonomie, maar hoe voorkom je dat ze zich geïsoleerd gaan voelen ?
Top-down EN bottom-up: hoe leg je beslissingen van bovenaf op, terwijl je de werklvoer nodig hebt voor cruciale strategische en marktinformatie ?
Details EN totaalbeeld: hoe scan je enorme hoeveelheden gegevens en smeed je deze samen tot een betekenisvol geheel ?
Flexibel EN stabiel: hoe houd je focus en doelgerichtheid in een proces van voortdurende verandering ?
Bijna niemand kan deze leiderschapsparadoxen in zijn eentje overbruggen; gedeeld leiderschap in alle lagen van de organisatie wel.
*** Translation and Additional Commenting by Sir PK
The Paradox of Leadership
A paradox is the conception of two alternatives as mutually exclusive, while there seems to be a need for both concepts to be true.
Latin paradoxum, from Greek paradoxon, from neuter singular of paradoxos, conflicting with expectation: para-, beyond + doxa, opinion (from dokein, to think). See also: contradictio in terminis.
1) A seemingly contradictory statement that may nonetheless be true.
2) One exhibiting inexplicable or contradictory aspects.
3) An assertion that is essentially self-contradictory, though based on a valid deduction from acceptable premises.
4) A statement contrary to received opinion.
5) An apparently sound argument leading to a contradiction.
Simply put, a complex challenge can be described as a situation demanding action ... but for which we have no resources, or framework, for acting. For leaders today, this is more likely the status quo than an occasional experience. As a result of such ambiguity, learning to embrace paradox is key to leadership in times of complexity.
Swift and Mindful
Concerning the impact of technology on leadership, the most common response is the "need for speed". As a result, many organizations and individuals make bad decisions because they have not taken the time to understand the situation and think through alternatives. The dilemma: how to balance efficient, habitual responses with fresh ideas and innovation.
Individual and Community
Technology provides us with tools that give individuals a great deal of autonomy. A survey showed that email is the most frequently used type of communication today - above the telephone (98%). But a 1999 study by Randstad North America found that the top reason employees gave for staying with their current company was affection for coworkers (71%). This happens through face-to-face interaction and shared experience. The dilemma: how to create ways for individuals to be autonomous without feeling isolated.
Top-Down and Grassroots
Many organizations are still based on a hierarchical structure, and frequently someone at the top needs to make a fast decision. A hierarchical structure is predicated on the idea that someone in charge, is presumably in control and has "the answer." The trouble is that many people who are at the top of organizations today don't know the answer and in fact, there may not be one. The dilemma: how to decide when to use control while also increasing collaboration.
Details and Big Picture
The need to manage and prioritize an enormous amount of data has never been more demanding. Yet to stay competitive, leaders must also be able to link all these bits of information together to identify patterns. The dilemma: how to sift through vast amounts of data and weave it together so that it becomes meaningful.
Flexible and Steady
With new technologies and changing economic conditions, organizations have to be able to sense needs and opportunities, adapt and improvise. Ongoing mergers, acquisitions, alliances and downsizing means that employees are frequently working on teams of continuously shifting players. At the same time, we must maintain some sense of priorities and movement toward a common direction. The dilemma: how to maintain focus and purpose in the midst of continuous change.
Taken together, the five paradoxes can be daunting. Yet recognizing paradox allows us to accept, even embrace, the inherent complexity, ambiguity and challenge in our leadership roles and in our personal lives.
A final point: In reality, few people can bridge all of the leadership paradoxes alone. In fact, complex challenges require a sense of leadership that is shared, where leadership exists in the dialogue and relationships between people rather than in any one individual.
*** WHAT MAKES A LEADER: From the Harvard Business Review Press, 2001.
Insights from recent articles on leadership published between 1998 and 2001.
Daniel Goleman: Emotional intelligence helps, including self-awareness, self- regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills.
Michael Maccoby: Self-absorbed executives can bring exceptional vision and courage to the office, but narcissistic managers will need a trusted associate to keep them rooted in reality.
Daniel Goleman: Leadership approaches must fit the situation, and among the distinctive styles that work in some circumstances but not others are those that are coercive, authoritative, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting, or coaching.
Thomas Davenport and John Beck: Getting the attention of your employees if your message is to stick, and engaging their emotions is a powerful avenue for doing so; reminding employees of potential threats to the firm and creating internal competition among them helps.
Dan Ciampa and Michael Watkins: Executive successors must do their due diligence on the person they are replacing before they step in.
John Peterman: Make your vision unambiguous, the company mission precise.
Robert Goffee and Gareth Jones: Authenticity counts, and for that it helps to reveal your weaknesses, draw on your intuition for timing and action, and give people what they need, not necessarily what they want.
Eric Schmidt: When times are especially tough, avoid over-cautiousness and overcome a culture of fear.