One flaw I’ve noticed with 43 Things since I started using it has to do with how people add new goals to their lists. When I’m going to add a new goal, the first thing I do is search other peoples’ goals looking for similar (if not identical) goals. Unless you’re doing something really unusual, there’s a good chance that someone else is doing it too, and that’s a big part of what makes 43 Things so interesting to me. As discussed in the FAQ, shared goals provide an opportunity to share information, get inspiration and so forth. The problem is that a lot of people apparently don’t search for previously established goals similar to theirs, and so they just make a new entry that duplicates an existing entry but uses a slightly different title.
Here’s an example from this morning. I’ve recently picked up a copy of David Allen’s Getting Things Done, in an attempt to get my act together, and I thought I’d add this as one of my 43 things. When I visit the 43 Things site and search for “gtd”, it finds 17 goals (including “gtd”, “try GTD”, “Learning GTD” and “master GTD”) that contain that acronym in their title . One of those seems to have been declared the “winner”, with 38 people sharing that goal, but a number of other entries that are basically describing the same goal have only one or two people attached to them. It gets worse, though: if I instead search 43 Things for the words “getting things done”, there are a number of other possible matches.
I initially wondered if the tags associated with goals might offer a way out of this mess, but they really don’t. Yes, I can search for goals that have been tagged with gtd, but for the problem at hand that’s not really any different from searching for gtd in the goals’ subject lines: if you don’t do that search before you enter your new goal, you can still manage to enter a “new” goal that’s just a dupe of some other goal. The problem is compounded by the fact that, as far as I can tell, 43 Things doesn’t allow you to edit a goal and associate tags with it unless you’ve already “signed up” for that goal. As noted by Clay Shirkey, the real value of using folksonomies comes from “aggregate interaction”, or to use smaller words, when other people assign tags to your data.