Hello, as we organize ourselves, we’ll probably find some gaps in our taxonomy that may require their own forums. I think I have one called “external environment.”
Examples include:
Ambient lighting
Air quality (smog & dust & mold etc)
Weather-related phenomena
Sound (specifically designed ones vs ambient noise)
EMF levels
Daylight length
Odors
Electrical charge (static buildup on the body)
Measuring and tracking these things so we can correlate them with things like mood and stress levels and even methylated DNA is really important. Should we open a new forum for external variables that impact health?
We’re still experimenting, I think both Dave and Christian are right here. Some Forums haven’t gotten going yet and are still placeholders. Meanwhile, there are plenty of open spaces in the structure. Here’s my suggestion:
Keep the placeholder forums for now. We’re JUST starting… let’s see what happens.
Dave: start any threads that don’t fit elsewhere in the “open” forum. We have the ability to gather these together and move them all at once to a new Forum, when the time comes. We’ll reevaluate the structure pretty soon, but I’d like to give it a bit more time and make some changes all at once.
Personally, I’d like to see categories at the QSWiki mirror the forum topics, at a minimum, and then build the QSWiki as a knowledge base as topics are discussed over time in the forum. This would keep the proliferation of forums down while building the community knowledge up.
[quote=“Greg_Tucker-Kellogg, post:4, topic:133”]
Personally, I’d like to see categories at the QSWiki mirror the forum topics, at a minimum, and then build the QSWiki as a knowledge base as topics are discussed over time in the forum.[/quote]
Exactly. After knowledge crystallizes as a result of Q&A in a forum topic, it would be great to publish on the QS wiki a comprehensive summary of the discussion. I think one of the candidate topics already would be State of the art for quantified weight loss.
As for organizing forums, I think we’re a bit in the area of having too many, some of which haven’t yet been used, or have seen very light use (Data Ownership, for instance). Posting in the QS Open Forum would be a good way to see what groups of topics emerge.
The forum software also supports sub-forums. Data Ownership could be a sub-forum of Apps & Tools.
I initially created the forums by mirroring the most populated tags at the Quantified Self Guide: apps (totaling “Android”, “iPhone” and “Web apps”) was #1. It was followed by Heath, then Fitness etc. We somehow lost Health in the initial process, but it might be a good idea to have it as a catch-all if a topic doesn’t fit better in another forum. This would solve, I think, Dave’s inquiry about environmental monitoring. On the other hand, “Health” may be about as general as “QS Open Forum”, so as Gary says, let’s wait and see.
As far as Health goes I don’t see a reason to have a different forum for nutrition and fitness.
The goal of effective nutrition is to ‘get in shape’. ‘Get in shape’ is part of fitness
At the moment we have in both of those forums threads about fat loss.
I agree - let’s use the open forum for now, but how we structure high level forums will shape the results years down the road, as it drives focus.
I’m not in favor of health as it’s not the same as “in shape” or “fitness.” For instance, I’m in shape (lean, muscles, etc) but I am not technically fit since I haven’t worked out in 2 years on purpose. (starting again btw). And my anti-aging friends are into health as measured by telomeres, but not exercise often.
I’d say a high level taxonomy is:
nutrition (contains fat loss and foods for exercise)
exercise (contains athletic performance and muscle/bodybuilding)
[quote=“Dave_Asprey, post:7, topic:133”]I’d say a high level taxonomy is:
nutrition (contains fat loss and foods for exercise)
exercise (contains athletic performance and muscle/bodybuilding)[/quote]
A better name for the Fitness forum would then be “Exercise” (as its description read - “exercise, working out”). I’ve made the change.
Nice call. We are going to continue to work on nailing these down. It’s far easier to pigeonhole technology than it is behavioral/bio stuff. Exercise totally works, and sub-forums for endurance vs strength vs flexibility for example. Then nutrition can have sub forums for styles (low carb, protein cycling, high fat, paleo, etc.) as well as for goals (eating for strength, eating for flexibility, eating for endurance…)
