Directionality doesn't really matter if you can see both notes at once (e.g. side by side in Obsidian panes; an array of paper cards on your table).

Though, if time is your fundamental ordering pattern, you could use old-to-new flow whereby new stuff preferentially appends to old notes before they're codified as new/standalone/etc. notes. See also: TheSephist's incremental notes

I think the underlying point is one of common law-like precedence -- some (set of) note N, constrains the semantic/action/application/etc. space of (novel) (set of) note N'. Though, I'm not a mathematician...

Citation doesn't have to be hard either -- Zotero immediately comes to mind

Mostly communicative efficiency :-)

Terribly relatable :-)

Internal models/schemas of slipbox use take precedence over external models/schemas of slipbox use (indexing, addressing, etc.). Implicates Luhmann may have had tacit "handling" experiences with his slipbox unknown to us even today

General definition of Zettelkasten as a collection of notes that serves to extend/reflect one's thinking and/or memory, networked or not

Less about finding people, more about finding their work -- namely whether the Zettelkasten does or does not aid productivity. Many people have goals for their slipbox -- personal learning, theory-crafting, information organization, etc. -- but to what extent have they actually attained these goals?

... because functional differentiation of notecards will occur regardless of your original / top-level categories so long as you append notecards to their most relevant neighbor

and/or the class system could be dictated on the level of agency available to the character. Passive classes tend to have less agency, active classes tend to have more agency. I'm thinking about how Caliborn, a Lord, had enough agency to not trick Calliope into removing the chain but to just bite his leg off. Very symbolic. And alpha Calliope, setting up a stage and essentially inviting Jane and Jade to share their memories. Or Muse Calliope contextualizing Jade about John's retcon and his alt-self death.

Our personalities sublimate and gain complexity in the presence of others.

Informational dark matter

I dream of the day this phrasing changes.

You mean, "The right side of the brain talks to the left side of the brain as a different entity".

Yikes.

It's really really really ironic that, as our knowledge graphs and gardens become more complex, the harder it is to incentivize ourselves to discuss their inner workings with people. It's a lot how we can't explain how our literal brain (and to a cognitive extent, our minds) works. We focus on the output. And so [[We work from terminal components]].

So true! But this doesn't acknowledge the fact that tools for thought are not modeled after our minds. Programmers do not have concepts like "the unconscious" or "dreaming" in mind while making note-taking apps. [[All current tools for thought fixate on highly conscious thinking]].

It's genuinely wild that we're coming to similar/same conclusions but with different mental modes. Matuschak is really keen on the crystallizing "Evergreen note" model. I'm more keen on the fluid-continuous fundamental unit of [[mental contexts]].

Anyway. In my words, this would be called "bruteforcing insight from old material" (which I use in the Ne-Si pairing), or "old works precipitate new ideas and themes with time and resurfacing".

Seedboxes are incredibly useful. I never really bother with the categorization of "fleeting notes". All notes are, in a sense, fleeting.

Genius is raw, belligerent, uncontainable insight.

something something wrong side of history something something but you didn't hear it from me...

Glory to MEGACORP! /s

an exemplification of the pride of the mundane

IMO, this is not the only way to share your progress.

Knowledge loves to be shared--not necessarily applied, all the time, every hour, every day.

it [knowledge] wants to be seen

https://twitter.com/ArchLeucoryx/status/1499860549978365953

"the eagerness to be useful to a friend" pulls fragments from your mind. i unabashedly quoted and referenced other people's posts in my early Tumblr reblogs when i was just getting started there. but too much of it is exhausting:

https://twitter.com/ArchLeucoryx/status/1499856226523365376

The skull emoji is me confused over the tone of the message. Is it negative? Is it regretful? I genuinely can't tell.

The other message is just that. I don't know much about you. I was genuinely surprised to hear you were part of dreamlying. Regardless, I regret we didn't get to know each other better.

Posts in Mastodon are almost certainly called toots for endearment/whimsy. Birds tweet, but elephants toot.

I love this song so, so, so much. Thank you, Lianne La Havas.