Difference between revisions of "CWCki talk:General"
(you seem to be speekking across purposes) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== you seem to be | == you seem to be speaking across purposes == | ||
OK this "no shit it to minor" rant (no disrespect intended) seems to be counter-intuitive and ambiguous. The documentation of every single act (including bowel movements) is how we focus and from that detail comes the insight. If Chris posts a new pic on Facebook, we need to document every detail including what he is wearing, where he is, the device used to take the pic, how he is holding the device, etc etc.. The devil is in the details and without this information, a deeper meaning and connection may not be made later on. For instance if Chris is using a digital camera instead of his DS that is noteworthy and says something about what devices he now carries. If he is holding the camera in his off hand, that means he probably bought something that day and its in his dominant hand. The more facts and details you have, the easier it is to logically prove or disprove submitted facts. | OK this "no shit it to minor" rant (no disrespect intended) seems to be counter-intuitive and ambiguous. The documentation of every single act (including bowel movements) is how we focus and from that detail comes the insight. If Chris posts a new pic on Facebook, we need to document every detail including what he is wearing, where he is, the device used to take the pic, how he is holding the device, etc etc.. The devil is in the details and without this information, a deeper meaning and connection may not be made later on. For instance if Chris is using a digital camera instead of his DS that is noteworthy and says something about what devices he now carries. If he is holding the camera in his off hand, that means he probably bought something that day and its in his dominant hand. The more facts and details you have, the easier it is to logically prove or disprove submitted facts. | ||
Again, no disrespect intended but i believe that "No shit is to minor" is a wonderful mantra, and that when we have limited information, not a single miniscule detail can be left unrecorded. But that's just my opinion. [[User:Slimz|.-~ Slimz ~-.]] 05:43, 27 January 2012 (PST) | Again, no disrespect intended but i believe that "No shit is to minor" is a wonderful mantra, and that when we have limited information, not a single miniscule detail can be left unrecorded. But that's just my opinion. [[User:Slimz|.-~ Slimz ~-.]] 05:43, 27 January 2012 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 09:44, 27 January 2012
you seem to be speaking across purposes
OK this "no shit it to minor" rant (no disrespect intended) seems to be counter-intuitive and ambiguous. The documentation of every single act (including bowel movements) is how we focus and from that detail comes the insight. If Chris posts a new pic on Facebook, we need to document every detail including what he is wearing, where he is, the device used to take the pic, how he is holding the device, etc etc.. The devil is in the details and without this information, a deeper meaning and connection may not be made later on. For instance if Chris is using a digital camera instead of his DS that is noteworthy and says something about what devices he now carries. If he is holding the camera in his off hand, that means he probably bought something that day and its in his dominant hand. The more facts and details you have, the easier it is to logically prove or disprove submitted facts.
Again, no disrespect intended but i believe that "No shit is to minor" is a wonderful mantra, and that when we have limited information, not a single miniscule detail can be left unrecorded. But that's just my opinion. .-~ Slimz ~-. 05:43, 27 January 2012 (PST)