I appreciate people when they respectfully disagree. The point of these conversations to learn from each other. If we all say “all of us is right”, then, there is no genuine conversation, and there is genuine lesson to be learned. I know postmodernism wants us to believe that every method or approach is right by its own. NO!. Reality don’t work that way. There are better/right ways of doing sth and there are wrong/ineffective ways of doing it. That is why conversations like this are useful.
On that background:
I would like to appreciate your clarity of thought in the issue. Your use of tags is also brilliant. They are really useful in that way–to categorize notes.
But, I would also like to disagree on your assessment of the two alternatives:
a) the linked method: or the Zettel method
b) the traditional method (long essay) with sparse links.
I think the Zettel method is problematic on a number of considerations:
- You said you know your links: that you don’t need to check on each of them while reading as you already know what they talk about.
But, I don’t this would work for a long time. For now, you know what your hyperlinked notes talks about. So, you don’t need to click on each of them. That is fine. But, the problem is as the time passes and the number of notes accumulates, you will start to forget what those links to talk about. You will be forced to click to check each of them—the problem of disruption.
/This argument is based on the assumption that you will keep your notes for a long time. That is actually what will happen in most of the cases, for most of us. Our notes will be laying around for a long time. One might argue that I will process/compose my notes before I forget them, or soon enough. My counter argument to that would be then why that person want so link them in the first place. Why she/he cannot just write them straight to an essay/book/article?/
- The second issue is the readability issue for other users(readers). Writing is not always for your self. You are already publishing your articles. AS you have linked above, you have published them using both approaches. The Zettel method might work good for you. But, it is a pain for other readers (users) because we don’t know what those links talk about—as such, we are forced to click on each like to get all your ideas on a certain topic. Your summary of the Shallow, on the other hand, is much straightforward for the reader because almost every relevant point you are making is laid down there. I don’t feel that I am missing something from your review even if I don’t click any of your links.