Thank you for your feedback! I will keep iterating on the text. Overall I agree though :) Its interestingness might scale with user activity, being a social network.
https://anagora.org/ might clarify what it does: it surfaces content related to the node you're visiting using a lightweight fanout convention (lightweight in particular once you get the setup right or if you're already taking notes using something like roamresearch.com).
Essentially when you click on a wikilinks such as [[hn]] you see many pages about HN sequentially, one or more per contributor (user). It's a bit like distributed https://everything2.com.
The network seems exciting but it definitely needs a less confusing explanation. Or at least an explanation that does not require prior knowledge of (what seem like) niche concepts.
> "It surfaces content related to the node you're visiting using a lightweight fanout convention"
Requires knowledge of what exactly a "node" constitutes in this context. Since I don't know what such a node is, the remaining part of the sentence about the fanout convention is just meaningless (it also seems irrelevant?).
Now, it is explained on Agora what a node is, namely:
> "A node is the set of all subnodes with a given title, or otherwise mapping to a single entity or wikilink. Subnodes can come from a variety of sources; currently these are mostly notes as volunteered by users via their independent digital gardens."
This suffers from the same problems: I still don't know what a node is, since I would need to know what a subnode is. I'd expect a recursive relation where a subnode is simply a node that is a child of a node, but it seems there is a distinction between both. In any case, it's still unclear.
It seems as if it's written by someone who's so familiar with these concepts that they forgot what it's like to not have this background knowledge. I'd recommend letting someone without prior knowledge explain to you what they think it is in simple terms, and build your explanation from that.
Thanks a lot for your feedback! It is very valuable. I've tried improving [[node]] with your feedback in mind.
Yes, I agree; all text is a continuous work in progress. What you see in the Agora are my notes about the Agora as I develop it and think about it, essentially. Part of the reason I posted this Show HN is to get feedback from people new to the project yet presumably close to the current target audience, if there is any target audience at all :)
I like the idea, in general, but I'm finding this makes for confusing navigation. In particular, the idea of a "node" being the set of subnodes with the same name is counterintuitive to me. Maybe it's just the terminology, or maybe I just find things easier to navigate when they're presented in a strict hierarchy.
I did immediately get the "Everything2" vibe, which is cool, but the thing is -- I've never done anything other than a random walk through Everything2. I couldn't imagine trying a directed or semi-directed traversal of related topics in Agora.
https://anagora.org/ might clarify what it does: it surfaces content related to the node you're visiting using a lightweight fanout convention (lightweight in particular once you get the setup right or if you're already taking notes using something like roamresearch.com).
Essentially when you click on a wikilinks such as [[hn]] you see many pages about HN sequentially, one or more per contributor (user). It's a bit like distributed https://everything2.com.