the dojo psi

Video: Remote Viewing for Remote Viewers

These videos are just awesome. LD worked his ass off on ‘em and I see it was worth the effort. Here’s the second release from the TKR Remote Viewing and Dowsing Project:

REMOTE VIEWING FOR REMOTE VIEWERS
THE TKR PROJECT
EVERYTHING REMOTE VIEWING …
…IS RIGHT BEFORE YOUR EYES
http://www.dojopsi.com/rvexpo/TKRProject/

Below is the youtube version. It’s smaller and lower-res. The page above has a better version plus a high-res version plus still image screenshots for bloggers.

Let LD (the motion graphics guy) know what you think! There’s a forum thread on it, or a comment function at youtube. I hope he gets some feedback about this besides just my drooling, because this one is really cool.

Direct youtube link: Remote Viewing for Remote Viewers

No Comments | Posted in » Cool Remote Viewing Stuff, Links-Refs-Notes, Project: TKR

Remote Viewing Galleries

TKR’s fabulously talented L. Digges has made some promotional videos for TKR and remote viewing. This is the first one, a slow sweet number focused on the relationship viewers develop with each other as part of the mutual encouragement.

TKR’s RV Expo is on all through the month of July. Check out the forum and expo stuff, new stuff is happening regularly: http://www.dojopsi.info/forum/

No Comments | Posted in » Links-Refs-Notes, Project: TKR

Tasks as an Art Form

Out of the new-idea of setting everything up in a personal ‘task library’ came some other fabulous ideas from the beta testers.

If you’ve ever used Firefox browser add-ons, or open source software that has plug-ins, add-ons, mods, hacks, or other names for “special stuff that other people build and make available for you to use too”, you’ll understand this concept.

The original idea was actually, “Can I share my library?” which was a great idea, but I wasn’t fond of it in full for several reasons, like:

1. It would complicate things in my coding, making some private and not others, and I’m not willing to share my whole library.
2. It would mean the total quantity of available tasks would end up being so huge that it would be useless, like doing a search and getting 10 milion results, and people wouldn’t know where to start, plus they’d end up with a lot of duplicates shared across libraries. It would just take so long to find good stuff, wading through so much, with lots of peoples’ entire library shared.
3. It would instantly lose track of where/who anything came from.
4. It would end up with tons of available tasks that were kind of crappy tasks, just casual stuff people do on the fly, and I’d kind of like shared things to be deliberately done and focused on quality, so the feedback is diverse, is included locally, etc.

But I loved the base idea of that which was really, “Can I share certain of my tasks with other taskers?”

What if a person really put some major effort into making an exceptional task? Or let’s say, a small group of tasks with something in common?

It occurred to me — a sort of epiphany really — that TASKS are just as much an art form as sessions, if not moreso. Good tasks usually take longer to setup than it takes to do a session. From quality feedback, to trying to find non-copyrighted feedback (such as creative commons / copyleft, something you can credit but are allowed to use publicly), to a variety of feedback (custom paraphrased key info from an encyclopedia or website, a quality photo(s), etc.), putting together a good task can be a bit of work. They deserve recognition and appreciation totally on their own, totally apart from the viewing.

Could a tasker do something to ‘package’ those tasks up, so other taskers could use them too? So people looking for something to task might have some ready-made options by other taskers? Whether they assign these to themselves, friends, offsite groups/people, a local team, etc. doesn’t matter, it’s up to them.

I think that’s a fabulous idea. Better yet, I think it should be set up a little like firefox add-ons, where you have the option not only to download something (or in this case, you click a button to have those tasks [and any associated media files] copied to your own library), but also to leave a comment about it or rate it.

That way people making and sharing tasks can get some feedback from others, and that way if there are eventually tons of options for sharing, one can at least ’sort by rating’ and get the packages that other taskers have thought the most of over time.

This would also keep track of who did what; it might allow some taskers to ‘further build on’ a collection or approach one tasker had already begun; it would allow a tasker to ‘update’ a set later; it would prevent those borrowing from getting duplicates; it would emphasize the ‘quality’ of tasks that are shared; it would reduce the massive overabundance of shared tasks that entire shared libraries would bring; for folks who like exploring different kinds of creativity, it might give them a new area to create in and share with others; and it would provide a better focus on tasks as an art form in the project that most ought to be recognizing that.

So it’s a “win” on more than half a dozen fronts.

The nice part about the redesign of the TASKER module in tBot is that this makes a separate subproject like this pretty easy. It’s not a big deal to just let someone click a few tasks from a list or category, give it a name and make a comment and press a button, and have all that copied to new holding table and holding folder. (That way if the original provider deletes a file/task from their library, it will not affect the shared collection.) And it’s pretty easy to just have someone click a button and have it all copied right into their own library. Simple and fast and versatile; ideal.

I think quality tasking is underrated in the RV field. I think a lot of people put emphasis on things which may not matter quite so much (like wording–which probably does matter, but probably not as hugely as assumed in the case of free-response (vs. binary dowsing) RV), and don’t put enough emphasis on things which are ideal–such as having some quality, succinct, informative text along with a quality photo or video (and even better yet, all this able to be posted publicly without the viewer getting sued for copyright violation, which takes custom paraphrasing and special searching for media that fits that criteria).

I also think people tend to err on one side or the other in tasking, either providing too little information, or providing too much. It’s laziness really. A website about Easter Island is too much information, especially a few websites. A hand-crafted, very succinct yet informative and FOCUSED text summary, along with a couple good photos of the same thing from different perspectives (which should be whatever the text is talking about), that makes a good task feedback. And it should be able to be posted publicly without copyright infringement. Getting all those elements together takes time and effort.

When the tasking is ‘framed and focused’ based on the feedback, then the quality of that feedback becomes even more important.

So I best like that it provides a whole area for a special focus on tasks as an art form. That it also provides a bunch of other neat feature is just a handy side-effect.

I don’t know what I’d do without the beta testers because most of these great ideas and totally new ways of looking at all this are thanks to them. I’m the originally programmer so my model is both old and ’set’ and they don’t have those limitations so they are really expanding the horizons — and drastically improving the final product we’ll end up with.

They’ll get it free as a result of their help. I might charge for at least some of the features when it finally opens (2010).

PJ

No Comments | Posted in » Project: Taskerbot

TASKER: reworking from ground up

Inside Taskerbot the most primary module is the one called TASKER. This is where you create and assign tasks to yourself, to the outside world, and to friends in-system. It’s also where you see the listings of all the tasks created by anything anywhere in Taskerbot. There are other modules that do tasking of various kinds but this is the main ‘base’ of the project.

Originally:

TASKER had been set up so that you could task to yourself. Then it was expanded, so you could connect with friends in-system, and task directly to their pools (or vice-versa). Then it was expanded, so you could create a task for anybody even outside the program. You’d set the date/time for feedback and the system would handle it automatically. This approach neatly solved several major problems I saw happening in view groups. It would give you a link (no login required) that you could email a friend or post to a group for the feedback. It had other limits but as a simple way to task it was good.

But Taskerbot, aka “tBot” was originally based on the simple idea of creating your own target pool. The problem with doing this is that you need to be doubleblind. You can have humans do the task creating, but what you need is a ‘bot’ — an automated randomized system — that can “distribute” the tasks so they truly are doubleblind.

(So tBot is not a tasker software for viewers, but rather, it is a task-distribution software for taskers. Viewers and project managers just happen to also be ideally served by many of its functions.)

So because of its beginning idea, it had built-in limitations, like:

• If you tasked to offsite it was ‘over there’ and you could clone (replicate) it to save time, but only to another offsite task.
• If it was to yourself, you could clone (replicate) it but only to a ‘local’ (task to self/friend) type task.
• If you tasked a friend, you could ‘retract’ it before assigned, but the record belonged to them, so if they deleted it, you didn’t see it anymore either. So you couldn’t later go back and task it again to someone without making a whole new task.
• You only had one pool so you had to make multiple logins if you wanted separate pools.
• The TEAM module in development had yet a whole ‘nuther separate tasking form etc. only further adding to the complication.

Thanks to the ideas of the beta testers, who have been totally invaluable so far, this is being rebuilt from the ground up. It’s one of those, “If we only knew then what we know now…” things. Now we have a greater oversight on both its usage and its potential.

New version planned:

In the new idea, everybody has a ‘task library’. These don’t have task numbers, these are basically just a task set-up. Not for anybody in particular, just “a task”. All tasks go into your own “task library” first.

The library has categories, allowing multiple default target pools that MIXER module can choose from (so no more multiple logins needed for separate pools). Actually there are three levels of categorization but they are ‘floating’ heirarchical not fixed.

Also that means you keep any task you create forever, unless you delete them, so you always have them for tracking/reassigning.

From your library, THEN you choose something and “assign” it in any way you want — such as to a friend or offsite or to a TEAM. This means a lot more flexibility in the use of the tasks between types.

Every task record also has ‘tags’ allowed, so you can tag a given task with a variety of terms/phrases and quick-find anything by clicking on the tag-cloud term or using search.

Once you “assign” a task–clone it from the library into a specific tasking with a task number and so on–then it goes into a separate table for assigned tasks, and you can tag that one as well, assumedly with some different things that might include something about the reason you’re tasking it (eg ‘practice’) or the person/group/project for which you’re tasking.

This vastly simplifies the primary ‘create a task’ option because now instead of a different form for every type of tasking (to self or friends, to offsite, or to a team), there is just one form for task creation.

And since all the task part is already taken care of, there are only a few key fields of info to address (which vary depending on task type) in order to “assign” something, so that part should be quick and easy.

It also means when you first come into tasker it should be a little easier to figure out, as there will be only four options:

1. Create a new task for your library
2. Assign an existing task from your library
3. View the tasks in your library
4. View the tasks you have assigned

I was just beginning this process when my computer died — the power input jack literally broke into pieces when I was plugging it in one day. Alas as it had been on battery too long and closed down, it means I couldn’t even get stuff I was working on right then off it. (Although I need the software for database and middleware that is on it for ‘real’ work.) So we had to take a break from the beta testing for awhile. This is probably good because it had been pretty intense for awhile until we finally arrived at the “wait, let’s rewind and start from scratch” idea. I figure it will resume sometime next week.

PJ

No Comments | Posted in » Project: Taskerbot

Taskerbot BETA Testing

Taskerbot over time has developed into an extended “tools and utilities” multi-module program for taskers/viewers/managers. At the beginning of this year I pulled it out away from TKR so it is stand-alone as its own project, and then closed it to all but people who volunteered as beta-testing. I expect this to take all of 2009 since there is a lot (a lot!) involved.

In the process of going through the first and most major module, TASKER, the awesome beta testers had a variety of questions and requests. After thinking about it a bit, it became clear that the fundamental nature of the thing needed to change. It had been originally designed with one general usage idea, but over time had come to be used for a broader scope. It needs to be redesigned to fit that broader scope from the ground up.

I’m going to put some notes here about each module’s changes as a kind of summary, to make it easier at the end of the year to go back and see what all happened. There is too much correspondence during the beta, on the private tbot beta board at the dojo forum, to easily keep track of the ‘end result’ of a lot of discussion and testing.

PJ

No Comments | Posted in » Project: Taskerbot

Specific Data and Drills

One of the things that is most difficult in any psychic work is highly “specific” data–on command. We get specific data by seeming near-random or talent-based chance. We get generalized data all over the place. But when the question is highly specific: “What is the street number of the address?” “What is the name of the company?” usually it’s not expected the viewer will get that.

What is really the difference between a color (’orange’) and a number (’four’) and a name (’John’)? They are all just words. Usually numbers are considered “abstracts”, and allegedly this is why most people can’t remote view them worth a damn. But ‘four’ — whether as a number or as a quantity — is not really that much more abstract than the word ‘orange’, which is only representational, or the word ‘John’, which is also representational. Words are only markers, labels, so why should it be harder to do one group than others? Psychics get specifics all the time. Not predictably alas, but plenty often.

In a conversation about this not long ago, I speculated that one of the things that differs in RV practice compared to, well, everything else in the world, is how it is approached. In basketball, if you want to learn to play basketball, you do drills on layups and free throws and passing and dribbling and, whenever you can, you play a whole game. But aside from ‘ideogram drills’, specific to a few methods (sourced from Swann’s CRV, previously sourced from Warcollier’s work), there isn’t much drill-practice in RV.

Some of this is for a good reason: a sense of importance on the viewer’s part really matters. Doing 40 drills a day (which a couple folks do in TKR’s area of the dojo), is sure to have a reduction-of-sense-of-importance effect in the viewer. Drills always have that risk.

On the other hand, maybe there are other factors to consider. In order to do a specific “figuring out a number, or word-sound” for example, you need to be frontloaded — either by your own session experience telling you it’s there, or by tasker instruction — to the fact that this is what you’re looking for. Otherwise we’re back to sheer chance of random or talent, not a deliberate drill to work on a specific kind of data. That takes it somewhat out of protocol; not entirely out for blinding reasons (you’re still blind to the actual data even if you know the genre, e.g. “numbers”), but for process reasons (numbers and letters and sounds, if frontloaded, becomes forced-choice for obvious reasons, and leave the “free response” definition of remote viewing, though you can still try your best for free-response approach to the information).

If you work on a specific target genre, and you work on it a lot, then we are back where we began: at “drills”.

A lot of people would like to do specific work on a given target genre. They would like to figure out colors or words or numbers for example. They would like to work on sounding-out names. They would like to work on dowsing for lottery numbers. Whatever.

The existing practice-format of most of RV does not really have much place for that. Do a doubleblind session, which is on a whole ‘target’ — even at gestalt level a target can have quite a variety of possible data in it — and most of those don’t get into specific words or numbers anyway.

So how does a person specifically “practice” on a “specific genre” of target such as letters, numbers, words?

Well, to start with, you would need targets specific to those genres.

And, you would need to know you were working on a target in that genre for that focus.

And, given these are such singular data — you are unlikely to spend an hour on such a session — you would need some fairly rapid and easy way of getting those targets and that feedback. Because the time-consuming and laborious process of sticking things in envelopes would seem like overkill for something like this, and would have to be constantly re-created, and then you get into the issues of mnemonic memory with the envelopes and so on.

So over in the dojo, this inside the Taskerbot project, now there’s a utility called “AlphaNum”. It’s designed for 3 steps:

1. Import (fast bulk targets) a simple list in a spreadsheet of the targets you want for yourself.

2. Create named target ’sets’ so you can categorize them, e.g. ‘words’ or ‘numbers’.

3. View from one of the sets, so you can focus on whatever genre you like.

Aside from ‘numbers, letters and words’, this actually lets you create custom targets of anything with “up to 300 characters”. It lets you choose a custom ‘display format’ (size/font/colors/etc.) for that feedback, and it lets you put them in named sets.

So for example, if you had a ton of “no feedback” tasks you wanted to do, and the task directive was less than 300 characters, you could make a target set called ‘Mysteries’ and upload a simple list of all the targets you wanted to do. That’s it — a few minutes and a whole target pool is set up and the software will randomly distribute them to you so the viewing will be properly blind. You can delete them, replace them, etc. as you wish.

Taskerbot, unlike TKR, does not force protocol. It ‘enables’ it and ‘defaults’ to it, but you can delete/change anything there because it’s yours. Protocol is a ‘good faith’ assumption; giving taskers/viewers ‘full control’ of their stuff is considered more important in that project, as it’s not for new folks and proper-example so much as for experienced folks and flexible-tools. (I designed tBot for me and my friends–it’s open to the public because there’s probably other viewers out there who’d benefit from the work, but I expect a vastly smaller niche of folks to be serious enough about RV to use them much.)

I’m using AlphaNum (hacking it you might say) for a different kind of target: local targets. I came up with two big lists and made each one a set, like so:

Local Targets 1 — this has targets from all over my city, from my yard to a few miles away. These are not just locations, many of them are ‘activities’. Such as: Drive to Pete’s gas station and air up a car tire. Your target is that experience.

Local Targets 2 — these are “in-home” targets — so I can do them anytime and know I can get feedback right away. Like the first group, these are ‘experiential’ as well as ‘things’. So every activity (from brushing teeth to lifting weights to sweeping), and every ‘thing’, in my house is a potential target.

I just started these pools and have some work to do before they’re large enough still, so I haven’t started viewing from them yet, but I’m looking forward to it. My boyfriend is adding some to both pools, so there will be targets I don’t know in there as well. Kinda busy but once they’re large I hope to have a couple things a day I can do for local live feedback.

PJ

No Comments | Posted in » Project: Taskerbot, Psi Theories & Rambling, Target pool management, viewing numbers, viewing words/names

Restarting

It’s been a year since I put up this blog, and nearly that long since I forgot it existed. If you consider that I have six other blogs for various aspects of my life, this might seem more reasonable I suppose.

I’m going to pick this up again. There are various ongoing things that change in the dojo, and I ought to be taking a few minutes to document it as it goes along. There’s actually so much in the dojo at this point that without a blog it’d be pretty hard for anybody who wasn’t the programmer to keep track of it.

Onward… more later today on some of the new tbot things. I think I’m also going to occasionally feature a dojo session here, either from the TKR project or the Taskerbot project.

No Comments | Posted in » Miscellany

New ‘STAR GATE’ Archives Product

When the CIA released around five percent of the records from the collected projects now known as the STAR GATE program, I bought a program that ripped the multi-page TIF files into web-viewable GIFs, did this in detail, then I resized them all, and uploaded them to the web (at dojopsi.info).

Unfortunately, the index was a disaster. The filename in the index, if you went to that filename, it wasn’t that record. The file itself, the image, would have a different file number stamped on it. I really wracked my brain about it for awhile, but finally had to conclude there was no way to automate a scripting (such as if all the filenames were offset in the same way).

Depressed, given how much time I spent on it, I left the files just sitting there but without a clickable index.

Meanwhile, it turns out Tamra Temple spent about a bazillion hours (we’re talking months. This is an INSANE amount of work!) going through EVERY SINGLE FILE and renumbering them simply and making a detailed index with notes on content. She put it all in excel so it could be searched, sorted, and you can edit the notes and stuff for your own references.

After that much work on it, she well deserves a little compensation for the effort, and it’s not a bad price for this kind of thing. There’s more info and detail at the new website for it: http://stargate-interactive.com, check it out!

No Comments | Posted in » Links-Refs-Notes

The Matrix is YOU: The Truth Is In Here

I know. Only I could get cosmic about a magazine ad.

The great thing about digital cameras is that you can point and click any time, multiple times till you get it right, and transfer those files to the web, to friends’ cell phones, etc. Almost perfect.

The only thing is, you gotta go home or somewhere else, plug it in, transfer the image, then you have to be plugged into a printer, and then you have to have all the ink cartridges and the right kind of paper and so on, in order to print the photo.

I have too many cats, so floating fur and dust (and dander; how they love sitting on anything, in direct proportion to the likelihood doing so will destroy it) tends to wipe out affordable printers fast. I can clean them, sure, but the always-insufficient feeder-rollers give up far too soon, in a very efficient means of designed obsolescence.

Kinda makes me long for the days of Polaroid snapshots. Polaroid thought so too:

The perfect camera for live-feedback photos for the record, though it’s probably going to change technology on a far greater scale than that of course.

What’s innovative about this isn’t just that somehow they got a printer into something the size of a phone. It’s that their partnership with ZINK (for “Zero Ink”) is focusing on the paper. Their PR puts it this way:

Dye crystals are embedded in the ZINK paper and are activated by heat from a ZINK printer. The crystals then colorize, producing high quality, long-lasting, durable, and affordable images.

In other words, instead of putting something on the paper, it simply uses paper where every pixel of it contains the innate ability/probability to be any color, and then the ‘printer’ (so-called) using heat for communication, tells every pixel of the paper what color to become.

How cool.

I totally grok this as a metaphor for the holographic universe, and every person containing such inside them.

***

So there’s a psychic analogy here. My mental model about how viewing works is a bit different than the standard I guess… too much Jane Roberts as Seth I suppose. To me it’s not only “As above, so below” but for viewing, it’s “As outside, so inside”.

In this analogy, you could consider the old 1970’s “Signal Line Theory” to be akin to the ordinary printer technology. The assumption is that there is information over there (aka ‘the matrix’), which uses ink to move it over here (to the viewer) to the paper.

But in my viewing model, it’s nearly the opposite. To me it’s more like the session scan process is finding the components inside me, and bringing out the unique quality of all of them within me. I usually use the analogy of a color-blind test. Imagine the viewer as “the whole circle.” The dots inside are all the aspects of them. These are all ‘information’, which is “reflected in their outer reality, but sourced from inside.”

Say the target was the number 29, or 70, for this image. The viewer would “look inside themselves,” and would “find that pattern”.

(The inside and the outside are not actually separate, in my model, but perceptually we definitely experience them as if they were.)

I guess another way of putting this might be, “The Matrix is YOU. The Truth Is In Here.”

I often think that technology, especially computers, are man’s attempt to project what is within him into external reality so he can better understand himself. This one works pretty well for that also.

PJ

No Comments | Posted in » Links-Refs-Notes, Psi Theories & Rambling

Mission Feedback: Joshua, Revised

I got to task TKR’s mission last week. Feedback was yesterday. It was a tasking experiment, or rather, more like a “let it be” kind of approach. I normally believe pretty strongly in a very clear definition of what a target is and the ‘focus’. But this target was an entire situation, with background from years ago, plus recent events, plus current interview (with two people involved). So I simply tasked the viewers to describe whatever they found most interesting about the target, and made the entire thing the target, so they could have feedback on the larger situation.

It’s quite a trip. I’d never read anything like this before. This guy says when he was a kid he had a “merging” experience with a grey alien. Whether or not this happened he obviously believes it did, to the degree that he feels so much “one with it” that he eventually had this plastic surgeon redo his face and head to look more like an alien. I mean, they cut off his ears for godssakes, all kinds of stuff. The feedback (which you’ll have to log into TKR and go to that mission and one of the tasks to get the link to and see in detail) is kind of shocking. Partly that governments would let surgeons do this for “artistic” reasons (!) (this doc is from France).

It got me thinking about the issue of ‘identity’, of course. In a somewhat more normal but still rather unusual social world, we have people who feel they were born the wrong gender, and they have physical surgery to change what they look and feel like. So, in a way, I’m not really sure how this guy differs psychologically, aside from the whole grey-alien thing. I don’t have any reason to doubt his experience, given it sounds like it has profoundly impacted him ever since.

Because the tasking was so ridiculously wide-scope there’s really no way to say who does well vs. poorly on that kind of thing, at least on a detail level. But I thought several of the sessions had some nice info. Bear in mind that because this doesn’t have a specific-clear task with feedback on that focus, it is not qualified within the Remote Viewing protocol; it becomes “psychic work”. Some missions are.

Visit http://www.dojopsi.com/tkr/ and click the box to jump directly to “Missions” on the login page.

No Comments | Posted in » Active Tasking, Active Viewing, Project: TKR

Wanna View? TKR’s Weekly Mission

I occasionally task a target over at TKR’s project, the part inside the dojo. This week’s mission is my tasking.

If you want to play, GO VIEW by visiting TKR at the Dojo Psi, and — well, the easiest way is just to click “Go View” on the column at far-right after you login, because there is a little blurb at the top of the chat mat that announces the mission with a link.

(The ‘real’ way is to go to the Viewer Studios and on the column at far-left, in the middle section about “Missions”, clicking “Go View! (get a mission)”.)

For those who don’t know anything about Missions, I should mention this:

1. The feedback varies from ‘hard and complete’ to ‘none whatsoever’. In TKR’s “My RV” settings section, you can set your minimum required feedback. Feedback is up to the tasker.

2. The tasking varies because (a) it is allowed to be experimental at times, and (b) it is done by different people every week (TKR staff, generally, with occasional guest-taskers). Taskings may be highly-focused or wide-scope; how they are approached is up to the tasker.

3. You get a task and you have until the next Monday early evening to submit a session. All sessions are public so if you’re shy, use an alias. Viewers get feedback at 7:01pm (dojotime/eastern) Monday nights — privately, only they see it. That gives them time to think about it without distraction, make after-session notes, things like that. The task and its sessions and feedback go “public” at 8:00pm Monday nights (dojotime/eastern). When that happens, there’s a link on the chatmat, or you can click on the purple “RV Galleries” link and then the “Missions” link on the front page, to see all the sessions and details.

4. Every mission has its own discussion thread over on TKR’s RV Web Forum on the TKR at the Dojo Psi board, that is just for that mission (talk about the task, sessions, feedback, etc.).

No Comments | Posted in » Active Tasking, Active Viewing, Project: TKR

Tech headaches

It’s always something. WordPress 2.2 is the latest version of my blog software and I installed it as part of setting up this blog. As it turns out, there are PhP errors in the default installation that were causing errors on my blog. My server support couldn’t help… the problem was not the server.

Now you might think that wading through lines of code is something nerds like me do in my sleep, but you would be overlooking two minor points:
1 – I know nothing about wordpress, and
2 – I know nothing about PhP, the code it’s written in.

Despite this, I actually managed to find two bugs in the source code, which is probably a no-brainer, but of which I’m unreasonably proud. Probably because of the amount of time it took me!

So I’m putting it here so when some poor sap installs WordPress 2.2 (or a new theme later when still on 2.2) and goes searching for why his blog is broken, he might just find this post and it’ll help.

found bug 1
Directory: wp-includes
File: bookmark-template.php

line 331
'category_orderby' => 'name', 'category_order' => 'ASC', 'class' => 'linkcat',
needs to be changed to
'category_orderby' => 'cat_name', 'category_order' => 'ASC', 'class' => 'linkcat',
that resolves the problem of themes which call the bookmarks function such as
php wp_list_bookmarks();

found bug 2
Directory: wp-includes
File: bookmark-template.php
line 293
function get_linkobjectsbyname($cat_name = "noname" , $orderby = 'name', $limit = -1) {

needs to be changed to
function get_linkobjectsbyname($cat_name = "noname" , $orderby = 'cat_name', $limit = -1) {

that resolves the problem of themes which call the categories function such as
php wp_list_categories();

Mind you I also find ‘name’ instead of ‘cat_name’ issues in links.php(line526) and template_functions_category.php(line122) and category.php(line22) but it’s possible those are NOT bugs; changing them didn’t do anything for me, but if I run into more similar bugs I’ll know where to look.

No Comments | Posted in » Boring IT Stuff