5 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2023
    1. 1930s Wilson Memindex Co Index Card Organizer Pre Rolodex Ad Price List Brochure

      archived page: https://web.archive.org/web/20230310010450/https://www.ebay.com/itm/165910049390

      Includes price lists

      List of cards includes: - Dated tab cards for a year from any desired. - Blank tab cards for jottings arranged by subject. - These were sold in 1/2 or 1/3 cut formats - Pocket Alphabets for jottings arranged by letter. - Cash Account Cards [without tabs]. - Extra Record Cards for permanent memoranda. - Monthly Guides for quick reference to future dates. - Blank Guides for filing records by subject.. - Alphabet Guides for filing alphabetically.

      Memindex sales brochures recommended the 3 x 5" cards (which had apparently been standardized by 1930 compared to the 5 1/2" width from earlier versions around 1906) because they could be used with other 3 x 5" index card systems.

      In the 1930s Wilson Memindex Company sold more of their vest pocket sized 2 1/4 x 4 1/2" systems than 3 x 5" systems.

      Some of the difference between the vest sized and regular sized systems choice was based on the size of the particular user's handwriting. It was recommended that those with larger handwriting use the larger cards.

      By the 1930's at least the Memindex tag line "An Automatic Memory" was being used, which also gave an indication of the ubiquity of automatization of industrialized life.

      The Memindex has proved its success in more than one hundred kinds of business. Highly recommended by men in executive positions, merchants, manufacturers, managers, .... etc.

      Notice the gendering of users specifically as men here.

      Features: - Sunday cards were sold separately and by my reading were full length tabs rather than 1/6 tabs like the other six days of the week - Lids were custom fit to the bases and needed to be ordered together - The Memindex Jr. held 400 cards versus the larger 9 inch standard trays which had space for 800 cards and block (presumably a block to hold them up or at an angle when partially empty).

      The Memindex Jr., according to a price sheet in the 1930s, was used "extensively as an advertising gift".

      The Memindex system had cards available in bundles of 100 that were labeled with the heading "Things to Keep in Sight".

  2. Oct 2022
    1. While he previously recommended using note cards of the same size, the examples in Goutor (1980) have 3x5" cards for bibliographic notes and 5x7" or larger cards for content notes. (p19, 21)


      Is there a reason stated anywhere here for this discrepancy or change? One would ostensibly keep them in different places/sections of one's card index, but does the size difference help to differentiate the two to aid in sorting? Is the larger card intended to hold more long form writing?

      Goutor is in Canada, so were 5x7" cards more common or standardized there in the late 1970s and early 80s?

      A5 measures 148 × 210 millimeters or 5.83 × 8.27 inches, so is a bit larger than 5x7".

      5x7" is a more standard photo size, so was this chosen as the result of storage options from the photography space?

      5x7" is scantly available in America in 2022, but only from Hamilco. A few others make cardstock in that size but not specifically as index cards.

  3. Sep 2022
    1. Posted byu/jackbaty4 hours agoCard sizes .t3_xib133._2FCtq-QzlfuN-SwVMUZMM3 { --postTitle-VisitedLinkColor: #9b9b9b; --postTitleLink-VisitedLinkColor: #9b9b9b; --postBodyLink-VisitedLinkColor: #989898; } I've been on-again/off-again with paper for PKM, but one thing remains consistent each time: I don't enjoy using 4x6 index cards. I much prefer 3x5-inch cards. I realize that it's irrational, but there it is.My question is if I dive into building an antinet, will I regret using 3x5 cards? I already have hundreds of them. I have dividers, holders, and storage boxes for them. I just prefer how they _feel_, as weird as that sounds.I'd like to hear if people are using 3x5 cards successfully or if you've come to regret it.

      While it may be slightly more difficult to find larger metal/wood cases for the 4x6 or 5x8 cards, it's a minor nuisance and anyone who wants them will eventually find the right thing for them. Beyond this, choose the card size that feels right to you.

      If you don't have an idea of what you need or like, try things out for 10-20 cards and see how it works for you, your handwriting size, and general needs. People have been using 3x5, 4x6, and even larger for hundreds of years without complaining about any major issues. If Carl Linnaeus managed to be okay with 3x5, which he hand cut by the way, I suspect you'll manage too.

      Of course I won't mention to the Americans the cleverness of the A6, A5, A4 paper standards which allows you to fold the larger sizes in half to get the exact next smaller size down. Then you might get the benefit of the smaller size as well as the larger which could be folded into your collection of smaller cards, you just have to watch out for accidentally wrapping ("taco-ing") a smaller card inside of a larger one and losing it. I suppose you could hand cut your own 5" x 6" larger cards to do this if you found that you occasionally needed them.

      For the pocketbook conscious, 3x5 does have the benefit of lower cost as well as many more options and flexibility than larger sizes.

      At least commercial card sizes are now largely standardized, so you don't have deal with changing sizes the way Roland Barthes did over his lifetime.

      My personal experience and a long history of so many manuals on the topic saying "cards of the same size" indicates that you assuredly won't have fun mixing different sized slips together. I personally use 3x5" cards in a waste book sense, but my main/permanent collection is in 4x6" format. Sometimes I think I should have done 3 x 5, but it's more like jealousy than regret, particularly when it comes to the potential of a restored fine furniture card catalog. But then again...

  4. Aug 2022
    1. shall I adopt the 3x5 slip or the 4x61

      Dow indicates in 1924 that 3 x 5" and 4 x 6" are both commonly had in a range of materials the US as well as boxes or cases to keep them in. He does mention that one can also cut their own paper, indicating that this is a possibility.

  5. Jul 2022
    1. so let's suppose let's suppose your listeners are with me and you know we kind of agree like okay yes transformation's necessary and uh again i want to emphasize i'm not talking about reform i'm not talking 00:58:59 about a softer better capitalism i'm not talking about you know improved voter registration or like any of those things i'm talking about de novo starting over from scratch what might be 00:59:13 best and if it turns out that the old systems were better than anything that humanity can come up with well then you know that's the answer but i can't imagine that's true because the old systems were never designed in any kind of 00:59:25 you know thoughtful science driven [Music] you know process to to to test to explore and to come up with fitness like what is the you know we don't even have a fitness for our current society 00:59:39 much less of fitness for societal designs i mean we have the gdp but that's a terrible terrible limited fitness metric 00:59:51 okay so suppose you're with me suppose we're we're on board we we want to do this de novo design thing where do we start what's the what's what where do we even get off the 01:00:03 ground on this and i suggest that the way to do it is through first address worldview from world view once we understand what the world view is 01:00:15 what a reasonable useful world view will be for this project then then purpose derives worldview begets purpose once you understand what it is you want 01:00:28 what you value what do you value once you understand what you value then you can say well i value a and therefore the purpose is to 01:00:39 have a manifest in society for example so once you have purpose then you can think about what metrics how would you measure whether are you so 01:00:53 here's a new design is it fit for purpose does it do does it fulfill its purpose you know that's the question and then metrics go with some kind of fitness evaluation 01:01:05 and then finally last of all of those would be the design okay we know what we know what we value we know what this thing is supposed to do we know what the purpose is we know that attractor is supposed to you know plow the ground or something we 01:01:18 know what this is supposed to do we know how to measure success and uh now finally then let's talk about design what are the what are the you know the specifics and mechanics and 01:01:31 how does that happen and the the series is really kind of laid out this way the first paper really talks about world view and purpose the second paper talks about the you know the more the mechanics of things 01:01:44 like viability how would you make this thing viable things like that and then the very last paper that's titled the subtitle design okay so uh that's how we uh and 01:01:56 and maybe i will just mention here that i put metrics before design because we might have some ideas uh getting back to that preference factor we might have some ideas like we would like people not to die at 01:02:08 30 you know we'd like people to mostly live to a ripe old age and have you know enough water water to drink and food to eat and all that kind of stuff so uh you know what kind of design once 01:02:20 now that we have metrics to measure that kind of stuff longevity and nutrition and things what kind of designs would help us to reach those targets you know so that's one reason why design 01:02:31 why metrics comes before design okay

      Process flow: Worldview, purpose, metric and finally design

      Paper 1: Worldview and purpose Paper 2: practical implementation Paper 3: Design