Who

Bictiopedia is a step forward for the book(s) of bipoles: a-the clearer race for more joyful wisdom…

I am editing key bipoles definitions as chapters of an .odt book in my freer time in the last 4 or 5 years. Before that i have been obsessed with wholist set(s) of triads and wiki edits in general, everything aimed to ease the purer and minimal lovely interactions the most.

This is why i feel so sure about the need of developing bictiopedia. I am already doing it manually and i feel it my most thrilling project. The book is a dump of what i am able to reach within this way of (un)knowing. It is not yet enough comfortably readable for the average Joe & Karen, but i will keep it reviewing and editing it to achieve so as my most important life-long project during some focused sessions every year, that i combine with other tasks for making this experience more accesible to others. Whoever could do as i do, and much more neatly than me, since i,like every explorer, have been through many mistakes and useful standards polishings.

I am everyday more amazed of how much deep and far anyone could get when following this way of doing. So amazed that i needed to propose to develop Bictiopedia standards more formally for me being able to do a better book-dump with better definitions from others with more expertise at some bipoles that have already overloaded me. I tried to maintain 200+ bipoles chapters, but at every reviewing session i try to concentrate deeper in fewer on them and diminish the total ammount of them overall. …this is a bit of a lie… deeper bipoles bits from this and the other and estrutures for both and more are constantly popping up in my mind…

In a related sense to my-our human limitations, this is a project to be very much done with the analytics objectivizing power along the flying energy of our magnificent subjectivities. It is very clear that each of the poles would benefit much from the other. Analitical Informatics could win us at playing chess or at specific tasks, but they will hardly beat us at oxymorons deepenings, banal but personally meaningful relationings and or poetical details for key taxonomies or axioms.

This is not the unicorn of a one man show but for now it is both, please assist… 🙂

There is something special in obsessed individuals with life long projects. If someday i am not commiting some edits in a side of the project, i am dedicated to indirectly and harasslesly chew pending ideas i need to sink in further for whenever soon go to commit some edits about them in some weak side of the project. I think this is also a task where humans could be better doing some bits of it than any permanently dedicated machinery. I, then, see my own constant dedication as a something very special, that won’t be possible to do it in a more populated project, because most of the times other project companions need having their show offs too. Show offs are cool if they add value to the project and are very easy to add to solid projects. Projects are solid because of their theoretical ground, and theoretical addons are the more important ones, so the ones that people more like to add their show offs in.

Adding a theoretical bit from someone else could make the project more populated but if the addons are added just by making it more populated, they also make the project more theoretically poor or buzzy overall because of that.

I have met other people that have theoretically wholistic lifelong projects and i see them somewhat messier than this mine one in some sense. I feel a bit of despair about them, specially because i see them too attached to the vocabularies and ontologies they believe too rigidly in, as if they were going to damage their long effort if they were going to adapt to some other more straight through ones. I have felt that rigidity and initial bits of superjealousy in the past that didn’t let me improve well enough because i was thinking that others could overtake me in the knowledge racing. This is something very obviously happening at scholars that aren’t flexible or open to adapt to new tools that could improve their bits. Specially scholars have the bug of seeing others too rival (specially outsiders from achademia). I met many of them that they don’t even reach to feel that mini superjealousy i had, they directly laugh at me and or ignore me as a crazy dude with an useless or frivolous project.

I am lesser hurt by that than ever before, nor i am thinking of sarcastically laughing back at them much. I am mastering a lot of things regarding bipolarities that i shouldn’t share them with many people either. I am less and less confrontating anyone anymore, i am now asking for other people’s shoulders and headings for the trip i am in, since this bictiopedia energy is too much for mostly or only me. I feel my baby is getting to be a kid that wants to socialize further than with mostly or only me.

I always have many tasks to face for developing this project in many areas. I move around simplificative sessions along further rethorical extending ones for the ideal sets and axioms that keep bumping the more consistently in my mindful body. I see my ideal sets and increasingly provocative axioms as something not falsified yet and everytime more falsifiable, so more consistent because of that, while I am everytime more open to change anything that i would see it flawing.

I couldn’t carry on specifying further and better if i wasn’t realistic with my own living, i wouldn’t be ready for making it more interactive and or be wanting to have and share similar joy, to the one bictiopedia gives me, in other sides of life.

I have to enjoy life very much more besides estructuring wordings and specifying more practical interactions for a better living. I need more joy for gathering further energy to face this increasingly energy-demanding task and, like everyone else, i also have to work (invest time in making money) for my (simple living) survival.

I would love to dedicate myself more to making bictiopedia a closer reality more easily enjoyable for anyone, but to be honest, i feel quite alone in making this project thriving. Because of that, any contribution bit will help a lot in that. I also have hopes for a big sudden contribution load from some enterprise related to the aim of this project. This is not only my optimist hope or ambitious wishful bet, this project itself is probably more understandable and on topic for an enterprise than for single volunteerings, but i welcome them all, i am just curious for who will be the first ones to come in with me. It could be anyone, this makes the present solitude very much fun anyway.

I am not living in a cave, quite the contrary. Always looking for communitary living. I have had a lot of meaningful experiences with some people punctually coming to help me or more regular contributions for some volunteering projects that i develop(ed) or was administering in the present or past, specially networks of willingly people suddenly getting crowded.

Again: This is not the unicorn of a one man show but for now is both, help!

Everyone i talk about bictiopedia don’t understand the name quite well, or straight enough, yet?… . Ok. Whatever, but when i explain it a little bit (easy formal yinyan for words, etc..) or say that is the methodology for making more open a book i am and will be always updating, they like the idea, regardless of the book being still quite hard to read and the project interactivity being close to none yet beyond mockups, which are quite comprehensive for whoever coder willing to implement any bit of it.

I easily wow any achademical side when i bring my this simplificative synthesis to their field of knowledge (equilibred bipoling of their opposites-dichotomies-antithesis… is the-my basic trick). But overall they ignore me soon. They feel even harder to collabore with this project. Seems like they have to fully understand where it goes and embrace it as i do it (or more), or they won’t add any bit to it, so finally everyone up to now i know of, rather prefers to leave this adventure solely for me (either considering me very brave and or very lame).

This situation, where i have to adapt to, keeps sounding very surprising to me. I am in a scene which is inmensely loaded with very powerful energy very easy reachable for anyone, but i feel myself in a weird loneliness with it, despite any claryfying effort i give to it for more people to come in.

Nevertheless, the more important thing i always keep in mind is that I am already with a big crowd even myself being alone developing bits for this project because the scope is broad, the idea is simple and the flaws calling to be patched are quite rooty and everytime more obviously causing greater bugs. There is always something very useful i could do for bicitopedia and flove.org very much better than anyone else. So my biggest challenge is already set. It is holding that responsability up while being open for whatever glass or big flood that could come to water the projects further, where the hardest part will always be to be able to fill myself with a lot of joy that it is needed to keep it rolling to whatever developmental point i could left it delivered during my life time.

I have set up this website for presentating this idea in a more clear way for trying to gather interests and resources from others for it thriving more easily. I am not putting all my effort in the presentational documentation, since i hope for my invitation and request to be understood more from the main ideas of it and your heart hearing it closely than from me investing more time in tidier specifying of details, which there are already a lot of them as well.

Design and programming is a very costy task for myself, while i could do a lot of smoothing at other things that are costy for others. I am everyday doing some documentation improvement, for hopefully with them more easily attract someone who could come with his-her enthusiastic-open heart to collabore with his-her own art or fund me to hire someone else to do more fine design&programming.

So what you see in the menu of this site and the (very few) links in these pages is what there is to hack on further. I am very open to debate, remove or extend whatever if that would help the project thriving. I can adapt to any contributive art and put a bit more effort in some sides of the documentation to make your possible help much easier. I hope i explained myself well enough (but you can also read more broad information about me, here). Time for me to shut up, thanks for reading, have a good day! 🙂