More about interest matching

[altivo]

I've been enjoying the interest matching and ranking memes this week, mostly because it has revealed quite a bit not only about my own friends, but about the way in which we all tend to think and process this stuff. It has also pointed up some shortcomings in the LJ interest listing.

For instance, if animist lists "wolf" in his interests, while I list "wolves", technically we don't match. And it's possible that we really don't. Perhaps he means WOLF as an archetype or a spirit, while I mean wolves as furry critters who are wild and beautiful but frightening to some people of narrow perceptions. But more likely there is a commonality here that is being missed just because we thought in different terms while making up our interest lists.

This affects our ability to locate others who share our interests, too. If I search for "wolves" as an interest, I will fail to find animist even though he is certainly someone I should know about if I'm looking for other wolf boosters. Likewise, in looking for LJ communities interested in, say, the BBC television series Dr Who you will get completely different lists depending on whether you look for "doctor who", "dr who", or "dr. who". Some of this could be improved in the code if the LJ folks were to add some soundex or fuzzy matching options. But I also think more of us should either agree on standard vocabulary for interests, or fatten our interest lists by putting in terms in multiple ways.

For instance, I've learned that I should probably list "ham radio" as well as "amateur radio", "wolf" and probably "lupines" as well as "wolves", and "padfoot" as well as "Sirius Black".

Many of us list very generic topics in our interests: "reading", "writing", "music", "drawing", "food", "sex", etc. This is all very well, but nearly everyone is interested in most of those things. To take advantage of the potential for finding friends who can inspire you, be more specific. Which authors and genres do you read? What kind of music? Which artists? This is especially important in light of the apparent limit of 150 interests per user. As you approach that limit, consider dropping the highly generic interests like "reading" in favor of the more helpfully specific ones, like "tolkien".

Don't be afraid to expand your interest list. Give it some thought, and make it describe you in more detail. It's worth the trouble.

This message has been brought to you by the letter I and the number 1000.

Comments

[hellmutt.livejournal.com]

Then again, it does give guidelines on the LJ pages - "use plurals by default", that sort of thing.

Maybe I should add "reading manuals" to my list of Uncommon Interests! ;>

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Heh. I read manuals too. Especially printed ones on paper, which of course don't exist here. The trouble with that plurals by default rule is that people ignore it, don't read it, or... sometimes it does contravene the intended meaning.

For instance, to me, "furs" are the same as "furries", fans of furry art and/or furry online roleplaying in various forms. On the other hand, "fur" suggests a fetish for fur or a desire to wear or collect fur.

Likewise, "leather" is a fetish (or perhaps someone's hobby craft) while "leathers" are specific garments worn usually by motorcyclists though also popular with the fetish and BDSM crowd. To an organist or an archer, "leathers" has still other meanings.

That simple advice offers no help with "nonviolence" vs. "non-violence", or "doctor who", "dr. who", "dr who". Do you list an author or composer by just last name, or include the first? Fictional character "hagrid" or "rubeus hagrid"? Both are in use by many folks. "tolkien" is clear enough, but I don't think "hardy" is unless you put down "thomas hardy" or "oliver hardy".

While it would be possible to create a style sheet to cover many of the more obvious questions, would it be read and followed? It makes more sense to me to implement a fuzzy matching or keyword matching algorithm that can be turned on or off selectively by the searcher.

[animist.livejournal.com]

thanks for the tip about plurals... I shall have to update my list!

Common Interest :

[favouritewindow.livejournal.com]

Horsies !!!

Re: Common Interest :

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Well, yes, I had figured that much out. More than that, though, I suspect. :)

Re: Common Interest :

[altivo.livejournal.com]

I had to go look. I think when I looked the first time, you had not filled in your interest list.

LJ says we match on four. We really match on five, though. You list "horse riding", I list "riding". An interest search shows that "riding" and "horseback" riding each produce about the same number of hits, around 550 total. And "horse riding" produces a much smaller list. The painful thing about this is that though those three lists overlap, they are largely different people and communities. It is nonetheless obvious that the intent of all three is "horseback riding" or some kind of "equitation" (probably yet another interest listing) and not "motorcycle riding" or some sort of sexual posture. (Yes I know, spare me the bad jokes, calydor.)

Re: Common Interest :

[calydor.livejournal.com]

Bad jokes aside, the 'official' term for the zoo kind of riding would be 'riding backsaddle'. Just so you know.

Re: Common Interest :

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Ya know, I'm not sure I need to know that at all.

[animist.livejournal.com]

It is interesting... perhaps they could do the sort of matching spell checking does and connect likely words that are synonyms for the same interest. Like you say... "fuzzy" matching. I think I shall have to consider ways to make my list more flexible and more applicable.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

And now we're up to nine matches. Probably ten, since I list "coyote" and you have "coyotes". I chose the singular because I really was thinking of the native American archetype before the biological incarnation, but both are of interest. :)

Maybe eleven matches. I'm mensa too, but hadn't even thought about that in years. I know where my pin is, though.

Coyote(s)

[animist.livejournal.com]

Coyote is an archetype and I am also interested in the animals, coyote. I am interested in Cougars, too, but that's not a totem for me. I shall have to revise my list again!

[animist.livejournal.com]

Oh... I added the totems of Wolf, Coyote, Dog, Fox... now... should I add the animals Bitches and Vixens, too? :) Semantics is getting tricky here!

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Yes, it is. Hopefully, the LJ folks will get around to improving their interest matching system some time. From my point of view, the feminines are included in the masculine. But that certainly may not be the case for everyone.

Since there is a limit of 150 interests per user, we do have to stop somewhere. What I do when I can't decide whether to add an additional form for the same thing is try an interest search to see how many people are using that. It seems particularly helpful to look at any communities that list the keyword. If they look like something you'd want to know about, you may want to add the same keyword (especially if they aren't using the primary form such as foxes in the case of vixens, or dogs in the case of bitches. Isn't language fun? :)