One scientific (occasional) blogger has a few amazing posts and videos about using tinderbox in a scientific thought process.
I’ve been borrowing some ideas from her blog, especially about ‘conversations’ with notes which improve them by updates and links over time. It made me wonder if there might be an at least superficial way to measure one note’s ‘value’ over time, compared to other notes.
Let’s say we simply use the number of times the note has been touched. Even if we were to simply increment some attribute counter every time a note is ‘hit’, then over time we can see which notes are ‘improving’ while others are becoming less ‘interesting’. Maybe that would even help us better ‘weed the garden’ in occasional reviews. I think the hyperbolic view is especially helpful here in seeing how to improve a note…
but maybe we want something at a simpler level that we can sort… then choose out of 1000s of notes we wish to improve the ‘value’ of, and weed the ones which are simply old, way out of date, or have become useless.
Has anyone thought more about this? Any ideas? Thanks for reading and any consideration.