Jambunathan K <kjambunathan <at> gmail.com> writes:

>
> The biggest diasadvantage would be fragmentation of information.
>
> All information needs to have authoritative sources and archives. I
> believe the info manual, GNU mailing list and the Orgmode.org domain (of
> which Worg is but a part) are the right place for such archival
> references.

Sure. But reading the manual from a to z or searching the mailing list for the
right line of elisp is sometimes very slow if you need a quick solution. I am by
no means suggesting that we should give up the established ways of archiving
information or discussion, though.

I simply think that something like "ask.orgmode.org" with a stackexchange-like
interface could be very helpful for a larger portion of users.

It may happen that redundant information is produced by this idea but I think it
will make orgmode more usable and less intimidating for new users. Something
similar has happened before: the orgguide was Carsten's solution for the complex
200+ pages of the original manual.

Besides I find that useful information is already pretty much fragmented across
the threads of this mailing list (there is also a lot of bugfixing, regression
reports and feature request going on).

Sure, the knowledge is there somewhere but it would be nice to see what works
and what is useful without having to try everything for yourself.

> I don't think anyone would object to having a secondary marketplace for
> trading of orgmode related tips and tricks.

My question is if anyone on this list would actively participate to get it off
the ground. And I think that hosting it on the orgmode.org-server would make a
lot of sense.

Is somebody here interested in starting this?