Twickit presentation on the Webciety stage at CeBIT 2010

Twick.it hit the big stage. At least 150 people were listing to our vision of a universally accessible social glossary which we presented on the Webciety stage at the CeBIT. Not to mention the people watching the lifestream on the internet. After the presentation (which failed spectacularly) we had a professional photo shooting and met Sascha Lobo – Germany’s most famous blogger. By the way: More videos of the CeBIT are available at TwickitTV.

After driving through a snow storm for four hours we arrived at the CeBIT in Hannover and prepared the presentation. To make sure nothing could go wrong we installed and opened all the files on the laptop. All the presentation lady had to do was to press the right button. She messed it up, of course. Markus waited on stage for about a minute absolute ages before he could carry on. Luckily I made a backstage documentation of this historic #fail. At least we you have got something to laugh at feel sorry for.

Vision of a social glossary

Twick.it at Webciety stage CeBIT 2010

At least 150 viewers stood in front of the Webciety stage. Markus introduced them to our vision of o collaborative social glossary – which everybody can partake and profit from. Think of a database of short definitions which are accessible in all kinds of electronic media at the push of a button – then you’ve got the idea of the explain engine. To show how it works we had prepared examples of our Tool Tip for the CeBIT website. We also showed how Twick.it could enhance the search results of Wikipedia and even Google.

Interview with Sascha Lobo

After our presentation Sascha Lobo talked about his personal highlights of the Webciety. The audience was asked to question Germany’s Mr. Web. As nobody dared I asked whether the dream of Web 3.0 had already come to an end. Sascha answered that not many people have yet understood the difference between Web 2.0 and the new buzzword Web 3.0. Moreover these words have been substituted by a new hype Social Media. Afterwards we briefly talked to Sascha Lobo before he had to go to his own photo shoot. He has promised though to answer our questions on the future of the semantic web and social media via e-mail.

Marcus and I would like to thank all Twick.it-Fans who encouraged us live, via Twitter and SMS. When the presentation failed the Twitterwall was displayed on the big screen. You could see a tweet of Billomat. His message “Go, Twick.it go“ is my most memorable moment of the Webciety.

Twick.it is the original

When we started Twick.it – we had a vision: to create a collaborative encyclopaedia such as Wikipedia which would be as easy to use and straight to the point as Twitter. This is how we found the name: Twitter + Wikipedia = Twick.it. Of course we researched thoroughly that no similar tool existed in the internet. It was very important for us to create something new and not copy an American model. And that’s the way it is: Twick.it was the first encyclopaedia that applied the principle of preciseness – the strict limitation to the magic 140 characters. Naturally we did not expect to stay the only ones with this idea. For a few months we have been watching a little start-up in Berlin named Wikwik.it which we would like to introduce to you.

This is Wikwikit

Two names – one concept?

Isn’t it funny how similar the names Twick.it and Wikwik.it are? Both glossaries have an Italian domain and limit the explanations to 140 characters. What’s more: Just like Wikwik.it we started of with the slogan “Straight to the point” before we decided to drop it for the claim “The explain engine” which is easier to remember for a newbie. It’s really curious. If the guys of Wikwik.it weren’t so cute one could easily believe that they have shamelessly copied our whole concept. But wait: if they had copied us they would have also applied more of our functions.

Differences between the micro-encyclopaedias

I don’t want to judge the design – that’s personal taste. There are basic similarities such as a huge search slot and the possibility to create and explain topics. This is very the likeness ends. Wikwik.it offers no semantic tagging; users have to set tags manually. You also have to select a language. Finally an automatic link to Wikipedia is created with every new explanation. These features lead to a series of problems:

1. Lost: When searching you never know in which language version you are.
2. Frustrated: The automatic Wikipedia link often leads into nowhere land.
3. Isolated: It is not possible to set hyperlinks. A solution such as our Tool Tip is not available either.
4. Mistaken: Apparently the search does not differentiate between tags and search keywords. The manual tagging means more work for the user and offers an open window for vandalism.

Overall my user experience of Wikwik.it was very frustrating. But the worst is yet to come.

Return of the edit wariors

The provocative title of this post is “Wikwik.it – Wikipedia in Short“. But this pinpoints their basic mistake: They have only copied the Wikipedia principle in short – including all the weaknesses. Just as in Wikipedia the users have to find a compromise on one version. Only one version is displayed in the search – and this undoubtedly leads to Edit war. If I don’t like an explanation I can restore an older version with one click. As every Wikipedian knows this will not improve the explanations. In the end the administrator with the longest breath will succeed.

The chicken egg problem

Wikwik.it is still in a closed beta phase. But you can already register to test the service. Ironically the guys at Wikwik.it encounter the same problem as we do. They need to motivate users to generate content – at the same time they need content to improve relevance and motivation for users. Therefore I would like to ask all Twick.it users: Register at Wikwik.it and test it.

Have I gone mad to promote our direct competitor? No. We would hate to lose you as user – but your feedback and opinions are most important for us and the further development of Twick.it. In the end only one service will succeed: and that will be decided by you.

How do you rate the miniature Wikipedia? What are the advantages or disadvantages of Twick.it in comparison to Wikwik.it? Which name do you prefer? Which function of Wikwik.it would you like to see integrated in the explain engine? You can use our support system for feedback or post a comment. Every opinion counts and will be considered.

Definition of explanation

As Twick.it calls itself an explain engine – you will expect a convincing answer to the question: “What is an explanation?” I say: An explanation enlightens the listener. It clarifies something by stating the relevant facts. Logical, consistent, sensible – and straight to the point. On the other hand an explanation is interpretation of information directed towards a certain person or group. It relies on context, understanding and existing knowledge of the addressee. Thus every explanation is subject to discussion.

Synonyms for explanation

There are several synonyms for the word explanation: Account, description, reason, justification, rationalization, vindication, clarification, elucidation, explication, definition, enlightenment and so on. This list indicates that facts are central to an explanation. In order to explain something I require secure knowledge – and I have to argue my conclusions coherently. I have to reason. Unfortunately this is where objectivity ends.

Whom am I explaining what?

It makes a difference whether I explain a topic such as The Beatles to a friend in the pub or to a student of music history. Addressee and context profoundly influence the content of explanations. As you never know who is reading your explanation on Twick.it I suggest: Don’t presume any pre-existing knowledge. Formulate your Twick in a manner that helps somebody who has never heard of the Fab Four.

What is my intention?

Communication is always a social act – even if performed using a neutral platform such as the explain engine. With my explanation I (unconsciously) try to persuade the listener (or reader) of my point of view. Perhaps I want to make an impression with my knowledge or I might be biased. Every explanation is driven by individual intention. I need to reflect my intention – otherwise I cannot explain in an objective way. Looking at the Beatles example I have to ask myself: Am I explaining what my childhood heroes mean to me as a fan or do I prefer Heavy Metal and dislike the old stuff?

Reason don’t rate

“The Beatles are the best most popular most successful band in the world.” These statements are not explanations – only opinions. They do not offer any comparable or measurable facts such as dates or statistics. Moreover every personal valuation such as “best” or “bad” requires comparison or understanding of the general context. Therefore valuations, comparatives and superlatives should be handled with care when explaining.

The Five Ws: Who? What? When? Where? Why?

In classical media the Five Ws  “Who? What? When? Where? Why?” have established themselves as standard for objective documentation. If you answer these five questions you will have covered a great amount of the relevant facts. This also works when you write a Twick. For example you can ask yourself: Who was a member of the Beatles? What kind of music did they produce? Where did they come from? When (during which time) did they record and perform music? Why did they become so successful? Of course not all questions can be answered in 140 characters. So you have to focus on the most important – and choose a good link that offers additional information.

A good explanation:

• Is constructed on secure information
• Is sensible and coherent
• Makes the questioner more clever

By the way: You find an interessting discussion about the nature of explanation at CommonCraft.

What does Wikipedia say?

The first sentence concerning explanation in Wikipedia reads: “An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of facts which clarifies the causes, context and consequences of those facts.” In short: Statements which describe facts which clarify themselves. Even though the content of this sentence is correct I guess that only very few people can make sense of it. (It certainly took me a long time to understand it.) For a good explanation it is not enough to arrange a couple of keywords, construct a long sentence and sound scientific.

Get to the point

In my opinion an explanation should not be too abstract nor too scientific, neither too general nor too specific, not too difficult to comprehend and not unnecessarily complex. In a nutshell: Avoid all superfluous information, specialist terms and get to the point. Focus on the main topic, be objective and make it as easy for your listener as possible.

Especially abstract concepts such as love, scientific terms such as fluidity and stars such as Jimi Hendrix are difficult to be defined in 140 characters. That’s the reason we developed the explain engine. It makes use of the stair-principle: Somebody starts – and the next person can build on this foundation and try to formulate a better explanation while the crowd guarantees a fairly objective assessment.

An answer to every question

Who are the Muffin Men? What does Hendrix chord stand for? What is the meaning of the abbreviation WWW? Many bloggers and writers use specialist terms and acronyms or cite names their readers have never heard of. They sometimes link to an external website which offers more information. The disadvantage of hyperlinks is obvious though: Some readers will not return to your own website. That’s why we developed the Twick.it Tool Tip. This plug-in allows every webmaster to display 140 character short explanations as tool-tip. Even better: By pressing the alt key and highlighting text the reader can decide himself which words he wants to have explained. Thus TTT can give an answer to every question.

For writers and readers

The Twick.it Tool Tip empowers both writer and reader: The author of an article can define topics which might need explaining. In addition the reader can check on every word of the whole text. This is how it works:

1. The author marks words with the html-command [ twickit]. TTT searches for the currently best explanation in our database and sets a link. As soon as the reader hovers above the link the tool-tip will be displayed. If the reader clicks on the link he will be forwarded to the equivalent Twick.it topic page.
2. On every website that installed the Twick.it Tool Tip the reader can mark any word, sentence or list for explanation. All he has to do is hit the alt key and highlight the text segment.

(An article about the installation of our tool-tip is in the making. Please bear with us.)

Weiterlesen>>

1. Knowledge is based on consent.

2. Sharing knowledge makes sense.

3. Knowledge is dynamical not set.

4. A short explanation is often more helpful than an overload of information.

5. Diversity is better than dogma.

6. The wisdom of the many produces better explanations than the knowledge of a single expert.

7. Quality and quantity are no opposites.

8. There is no “neutral point of view”:

9. Knowledge is formed by personalities.

10. Relevance depends on the point of view.

11. Knowledge can be explained, not edited.

12. Valuating is more efficient than arguing.

13. Positive support is more productive than regulation.

14. Entertaining knowledge attracts more attention and is spread more quickly than pure information.

15. A good links points to a source with relevant information.

16. Regarding knowledge “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”

17. The more people join the explain engine the greater is the use for all.

18. There are more important things that knowledge!

    Family, friends, animals, nature, art, sport… – live.

Knowledge is an exiting expedition – not a crusade. The guidelines listed here are subject to discussion and not a credo carved in stone. The engagement in Twick.it should be fun for everyone and serve the use of the many.

Twick.it is not a scientific encyclopedia
such as Britannica, Wikipedia or Encyclopedia of Life – but an interactive, informative and entertaining explain engine.

Twick.it is not a classical search engine
like Google, Bing or Evri which uses bots to automatically index the web – but a knowledge data base filled and valuated by humans.

Twick.it is not a social network
á là Facebook or Linked in. There is no chat function – only the possibility to send direct mails (DM). The networking aspect is secondary and powered by topics.

Twick.it is not a microblog
such as Twitter where random news can be spread. Instead it is based on a structural encyclopedic basis.

Twick.it is not a counsel community
such as Ask.com or Yahoo Clever! No questions of individuals are answered. Instead topics are explained in a general way.

Twick.it is not a dictionary
such as OpenThesaurus which only explains synonyms, abbreviations and specific terms. Twick.it is not limited to a certain area of topics.

Twick.it is not a slang glossary
such as UrbanDictionary which collects extraordinary topics.

Twick.it is not a bookmarking-tool
like Delicious or Mr. Wong where you can collect links on a neutral platform and tag and share them.

Twick.it is not a dictionary
such as LEO or Dict. But you can compare explanations of topics in different languages.

Twick.it is no…
cookbook, star forum, photo community, film data base, file sharing host, weapon dictionary, telephone book…

Twick.it is what you make of it!

Twick.it combines elements of the things it is not.

Twick.it could be described as a micro blog-encyclopedia in which you can explain specific terms, abbreviations, slang, synonyms and translations, which you can use to bookmark topics and build a topic driven social network. But most importantly the Twick.it search offers short, precise explanations written and valuated by humans.