The impact factors for thinking tool usability

_Tn

Currently, I don't know how to enhance the quality of thinking tools.
I feel the main reason is because I haven't quite nailed the impact factor for tool usability yet. For Zettel reusability, there are principles like Atomicity, but I don't know if there are any for thinking tools.

Here are my questions:

• How can I actively change a factor of tool usability? And what is that factor?

• How do you finalize a thinking tool, and make it feel as a "whole" (a.k.a. not just fitting a Zettel in a certain tool structure)?

  • Sidenote: "finalize" does not mean complete. I just want to change a knowledge package into a usable product.

• Do you have any Zettel/MOC templates that enhances tool usability?

_Tn

For additional info, here's an example of what I do in my workflow. (Ignore the small details.) I made several Zettels, and have a goal of creating a toolkit.

• Zettels:

  • "Animation basics: timing"
  • "Animation basics: curves"
  • "How frames are set in animation"
  • "How to move 1 frame each on YouTube & Sakugabooru"

• Goal: A toolkit for dissecting animation into basics by checking the frames.

What I currently do

1. Think of presenting orders. I know that I will come here to preview the basics and start checking fast. So I make a structure note (structure Zettel) called "Dissecting animation into basics by checking the frames", and put in all the Zettel links in the order of basics -> procedures.
2. Fit the Zettels. Put in some links in the Zettels, or create a compilation note to connect some ideas together. For this example I create the "Search for keyframes" Zettel which links to "How frames are set in animation".
3. Connect it to higher interfaces. This includes connecting to the home MOC, and the list of toolboxes. I connect to both of those, and also integrate it into the "Understanding Animation" MOC as well.

The end-product MOC:

---
created: 2025-02-25T21:43
tags:
- document-type/MOC
---
Linked MOC // backlinks solely for navigation
"``dataview
LIST
FROM [[# this.file.name]]
where startswith(string(file.name), "MOC) ")
``"
---

# Dissecting animation into basics by checking the frames

## The basics
Animation basics: timing................[[Animation basics: timing (2024-2-25)|LINK]]
Animation basics: curves................[[Animation basics: curves (2024-2-25)LINK]]

## What to check for
Search for keyframes................[[Search for keyframes (2024-2-25)|LINK]]

## How to check it
How to move 1 frame each on YouTube & Sakugabooru................[[How to move 1 frame each on YouTube & Sakugabooru (2024-2-25)|LINK]]

What I want ideally

In terms of usefulness...

• A structure note & Zettels that feels organic and more "whole", which eases the use
• A structure note & Zettels that has "power", which tells exactly what you need, concisely
  ...And hopefully more factors I learn along the way

What I experimentally do to make that ideal

• Write the MOC as a compilation note hybrid, to increase flow and make things connect organically
• Write the Zettel's content itself as link title aliases, and make use of context inside the MOC to make the aliases shorter
• Sometimes use model graphs instead of bulletins, to create an exact image that I need for learning

The end-product MOC:

---
created: 2025-02-25T21:43
tags:
- document-type/MOC
---
Linked MOC // backlinks solely for navigation
"``dataview
LIST
FROM [[# this.file.name]]
where startswith(string(file.name), "MOC) ")
``"
---

# Dissecting animation into basics by checking the frames

[[How to move 1 frame each on YouTube & Sakugabooru (2024-2-25)|Push the ",." keys on videos]], and [[Search for keyframes (2024-2-25)|search for keyframes]]. Then, see how the basics are implemented.

Some basics you can check:
(Image embedded, that shows visual cues of timing and curves)
[[Animation basics: timing (2024-2-25)|timing]] | [[Animation basics: curves (2024-2-25)|curves]]

Will

Hi @_Tn,

I'm intrigued by your questions about tuning a tool for thought. In this case, you bring up MOCs as a tool for thought that can be tweaked and tuned. But how to do this is the question.

One of the best ways I've found so far is what I call an annotated structure note. This is like your idea and practice of making a "compilation note hybrid, to increase flow and make things connect organically." The more annotation there is, the more flow, the more the note connects with prior knowledge, and the more value it has.

Here is a sample section from [[Writing Thinking Canvas 202407201743]] (I've taken to calling MOCs thinking canvases, which reminds me to work intimately with them.)

_Tn

I read through your post on thinking tools (quickly, I admit). It may benefit from a simple, clear explanation of what you mean by "thinking tool".
original message

In my definition,
"thinking tool" is a gadget inside a Zettelkasten that either

• levels up an understanding of something
• makes thinking of something simpler, and easier

_Tn

@Will said:
One of the best ways I've found so far is what I call an annotated structure note. This is like your idea and practice of making a "compilation note hybrid, to increase flow and make things connect organically." The more annotation there is, the more flow, the more the note connects with prior knowledge, and the more value it has.

I see!
Since text flow gives a personal depth on understanding, I suppose it connects with my definition. Since it's an unique aspect on text format,
I'll add "Text Flow" in the impact factor list.

　　

Since Text Flow is an unique factor from Power (the factor of telling exacly what you need, concisely), one way of using it will be using Power to accentuate Text Flow.

Method: Use more conjuctions and less text.

This is only useful on structure notes since Power cuts the details. But I think this helps with understanding structure better.

　　

That's what I've learned from your comment. Thanks Will!

Will

@_Tn, I love this idea of more conjunctions and less text. This is a powerful zettelkasting tool. You've got my head spinning with this idea.

Since Text Flow is a unique factor from Power (the factor of telling exactly what you need, concisely), one way of using it will be using Power to accentuate Text Flow.
Method: Use more conjuctions and less text.

If we define power, in the sense of a zettelkasten, as a factor of an idea that is exactly what is needed at the present moment, how can we turn the dial up to 11? What strings do we need to pull? Are specific software tools required? How can we tweak our mindset so we can get our zettelkasting flowing on 12 cylinders?

• This method is akin to parataxis in literature—presenting ideas side by side with minimal connective tissue—so that the reader (or your future self) isn’t bogged down by superfluous wording. Instead, the strategic use of conjunctions directs the focus to the core concepts and highlights the synergy between them. ¹
• By stripping away extraneous language, you create powerful yet accessible notes. The structure note becomes a living, breathing conversation with your thoughts. Each well-chosen conjunction invites you to explore deeper, making the note not just an archive but an active thinking environment. This approach not only boosts clarity but also enhances retrieval and creative synthesis across your entire Zettelkasten. ¹

Conjunction and paralaxis practice examples:

• Transform passive notes through an active network of ideas.
• Converse with your future self.
• Form a ritual of review.
• Link ideas through MOCs.
• Conjunctions transform ideas as they foster dialogue.
• Ideas stand side by side because of simple grammatical relations.
• Essence becomes visible because conjunctions and paralaxis align.
• Ideas shine because of lightweight descriptors.
• Conjunctions spark and sustain lateral associations.

Basically, keeping each idea clear and short shines a light on patterns or differences that could easily get lost in longer, more complicated sentences.

---

1. Powering Up Zettelkasten ↩︎ ↩︎

_Tn

Thanks Will. Those are some nice insights. Now I know I can incorporate literature methods (like parataxis) in my writing. Sadly I haven't learnt about it yet, though. I definitely need to learn about research first, since I just delve into 1 book and don't compare much...

　　

@Will said:
What strings do we need to pull?

My main inspiration for Power is presentation methods. Design, Text, Graphs all come into play.
　　
The pullable strings I see (for text) are:

• Imbedding verbal punctuation into text, which makes words kick harder.
• Extracting knowledge to present it, which filters out surface-level info. This is akin to file names & overviews in a way that it shortens text.
• Finding juxtaposition with design in mind, which groups and segregates knowledge. For example, bullet points not only makes a bulletin, it also indents text, gives more vertical indent for each bullet, and is separated from normal text.
• Highlighting text, which creates focus. My rule of thumb is that bold enhances the kick, and Italic creates nuance. Additionally, if you use Obsidian, Highlightr is a good plugin for highlighting text with color.

　　

Are specific software tools required?

CSS customization is a game-changer. You can tweak what each symbol does, and how it is shown. Making header font size bigger is one example. But when you can change the CSS code I think you essentially have Front-end design tools on the palm of your hand. If you know design, this will come in very handy.

Will

@_Tn said:
My main inspiration for Power is presentation methods. Design, Text, Graphs all come into play.
　　
The pullable strings I see (for text) are:

• Imbedding verbal punctuation into text, which makes words kick harder.
• Extracting knowledge to present it, which filters out surface-level info. This is akin to file names & overviews in a way that it shortens text.
• Finding juxtaposition with design in mind, which groups and segregates knowledge. For example, bullet points not only makes a bulletin, it also indents text, gives more vertical indent for each bullet, and is separated from normal text.
• Highlighting text, which creates focus. My rule of thumb is that bold enhances the kick, and Italic creates nuance. Additionally, if you use Obsidian, Highlightr is a good plugin for highlighting text with color.

Through visual attraction, each of these methods is a design power point. If we are making a list, let's not forget:

• More conjunctions and fewer words, leaving room for the curiosity of the future self.

I see what you have done. The phrase "Use more conjuctions and less text," uses a conjunction and only six words. Bravo!