I had an Idea

[faendryl]

I think it's a good idea. Basically, at some point in the not too distant past I was musing over whether anyone I knew was going to be somewhere I was taking a trip to (a particular instance, not generalized; I just can't remember where it was I was going. Let's say Budapest). It'd be rather inconvenient to call up or email everyone I know and

Comments

Hm.

[neveryou]

It's an interesting idea. It would be like integrating a calendar (with locations) into friendster, yah?

Re: Hm.

[faendryl]

Yep, pretty much. Of course, I haven't quite figured out my thoughts on the issue of friend groups (e.g., sometimes you don't want everyone to know where you're gonna be...). For the moment my thought is, if you don't want people to know, either don't friend them or don't post it. Thus the lack of a directory. But, still thinking about it.

Re: Hm.

[neveryou]

I think it gets much more complicated than this. You'd have to come up with a system of tagging (like groups, but more general-- I hate the idea of sequestering all my friends into discrete categories), and perhaps check everyone else by default, but give the ability to uncheck some people you might not have time to see. But it should be customizable enough so that you could still use the program as a general date planner/organizing system.

Another issue is that locality has to be encoded in such a way as to be able to generalize proximity appropriately. For instance, if I'm coming into Burbank, it should notify those living in LA, but not necessarily people in San Diego-- unless I have a car, and maybe it's a set of closest friends. You might be willing to make this drive, and they might be willing to meet you halfway, if you both have cars and nothing to do on a Thursday night.

Basically, it's a neat enough idea that I've dedicated 3 minutes of cycles to it. Neat.

Re: Hm.

[faendryl]

Yeah, the locality idea is the one that I've spent the most time on. I've generally gone with erring on the side of over-notifying, but there's definitely refinement to be done.

The customizable tagging list idea is one I've sorta struggled to avoid, morally and otherwise, but you're probably right that it's necessary. I'll think about it.

Glad you like it :)

Re: Hm.

[neveryou]

The only reason why I think tagging is a better idea than grouping is because grouping a subset of tagging, and tagging is just about as hard to implement (though admittedly harder to build an intuitive interface for). I say this beause I have no idea what your backend looks like. That wasn't meant to be lewd, but I guess it was anyways.

Re: Hm.

[faendryl]

Oh, Fred, you've seen my backend plenty of times ^_^

There's currently barely any provision for grouping in the backend (obviously there's some, given the friend list). Tagging on a per-schedule item basis would be a bit of a drag and take up some storage space, but it wouldn't be very hard.