The Artist Presently Blogging at Squarks points to the Wikipedia page covering "the Lamest Edit Wars Ever." He grabbed this link from the ccte tag listing at del.icio.us.
I think that ccte stands for Communication, Computing and Technology in Education, but this is merely an inference. It could as well stand for Copraphagic Commons and Tantric Elimination. In fact it actually does, but that’s what’s so wonderful about the folksonomic tradition. Everything means anything!
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
Thanks Frank. You’ve answered and unasked question of mine.
I’ve forgotten what ccte stands for, but have enjoyed clicking through their del.icio.us links for some time now. I think, um, I’m 83.5% certain, that your first guess is correct about the abbreviation — so, the next time that I “totally” forget what it stands, hopefully, I will remember to come back here — knowing that it’s “highly probable” that the truth is contained in this blog post.
More importantly (for me), you’ve triggered something. Perhaps it’s been written extensively in other places, but I was failingly attempting to recall why I added this link to my blog roll in the first place. It may have been because, either,
1. They looked like smart guys and perhaps they’d link to interestingly profound stuff, so it would be in best interest to link to them, or,
2. They del.icio.us-ly linked to something that I’d also linked to (in the past), it seemed we had something in common, so I aggregated their linkages and continued to follow many of them.
The relationship has evolved and their “true identity” has whithered into the shadows of those neural pathways that don’t fire very often. However, regardless of who creates the links — smart people from the school of Columbia or some pranksters from University Idioticia, the links continue to be “enjoyable”.
Maybe, “not fully knowing” the identity is preferable at some level; and will keep me from committing a judgement fallacy that violates a current or upcoming version of The Formal Meta Rules of Who(m?) Should Be Included On Our Blogrolls.
Oh craps, should it be Who or Whom?
In any event, thanks again for helping to trigger these (naively silly) thoughts about such things, and for answering a question that I’ve repeatedly asked myself, but have been too lazy to research.