Suggestions for using Scrapbox more for reviewing books

(Copied and pasted from a private project for review; 2017-05-18) I'm struggling with this, so I followed Scrapbox's best practices and started with a bulleted list.

• Current Book Reviews

  • process
    • Nishio will put the manuscript into "readable form".
    • Reviewer reads it and returns a review by email or other means.
    • Nishio will brush up on the manuscript based on review comments
  • Easy for reviewers to do because it becomes a "read the book and give your opinion" activity
  • We can assume that the reviewer's opinion is independent for Nishio
    • You get information like "several people say something close" or "two people say the opposite."
  • Imitating the methodology of Hiroshi Yuki, who has a reputation and track record of writing books that are easy to understand.

• Proposal to utilize Scrapbox

  • process
    • Put fragments into Scrapbox before they are in 'readable form' by Nishio.
    • Nishio + reviewer directly tease (divergent process)
    • Nishio will run the writing process (convergence process) at an appropriate time and make it into a "readable" form as a book.
    • Then the above review process
  • Divergent processes risk sucking up infinite time (the kind of thing that gets out of control).
  • I suspect that reviewers are not so interested in "figuring out the structure of my book".
  • The proposed table of contents is already structured at the stage of planning the book in the first place.
    • There are various parts of my proposal that I cut out for crying out loud.
    • If the divergence phase runs again now, the majority of it will not fit in the frame.
      • But you can publish a separate volume separately or make it available for online reading.
      • Some suggested adding it as a column.
  • Reviewers are required to structure information fragments in a multi-person, remote, time-asynchronous environment.
    • It's hard to do this alone.
    • I teach people who are not familiar with KJ method not to do KJ method with a large number of people at once.
      • Fragments written by others are difficult to understand, and the suffering derives from that and makes you dislike the project itself and the KJ method itself.
      • When I see examples of people using Scrapbox, it's like they comment on the spot that if they don't know, they don't know.
  • Something interesting might happen.
    • Serendipity cannot be predicted in advance.
  • The work of putting the fragments in simply increases the burden on Nishio.
    • The pace of writing one chapter in three weeks was set without taking into account the cost of responding to reviews....
    • The total burden is unreadable.
    • Maybe it's important to "not try to do too much at the beginning."
      • For example, the writing at hand in response to the question "What does the author think is intellectual production? in the first place?" or something like that, which I didn't share with the reviewers because it wasn't coherent.
  • There is a risk that readers will say "a collection of various information rather than a well-structured knowledge". There is a risk that readers will say "a collection of information rather than a well-organized body of knowledge.
    • Information needs to be "organized" for the book.
  • [/nishio/Wiki mode](https://scrapbox.io/nishio/Wiki mode).

If you were to co-edit, how would you do it?

• Have reviewers create icons: create a page for your ID like [nishio
• Use bullet points as a tree bulletin board
  • Distinguish between the ground text and your opinion by using Ctrl-i to add icons to the text.
    • like this
• Do not co-edit the "Chapter X-" page.
  • For those who want to read and review it as a "normal manuscript" written by one author.
• Other pages can be freely edited.
  • Especially like a tree board, writing comments, questions, etc.
• Reviewers can create a new page if they want to.
  • You may write a question in the title and leave the body empty.

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/書籍のレビューにScrapboxをもっと活用する案 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.