You need to first define "the Zettlekasten method"--a gentle suggestion

Maybe it's because I have posted here before, reddit keeps recommending this forum to me when I log in, and I'm immensely frustrated by the posts asking questions about "the Zettlekasten method" and the responses. Why? Because folks are talking about different things all the time. It's like chickens taking to ducks. From my observation, people define "the Zettlekasten method" at least in two ways:

(1) A paper or digital index card note system organized by folders, tags, links, tables of contents. (I don't think it's fair to give it a German name as its use can at least be dated in various cultures since the middle ages. Maybe the book authors and influencers want to lure people to think, fancy name=magic bullet?)

(2) A note system "based on the principles and practices of Niklas Luhmann's zettelkasten method," as the sidebar of this forum describes.

These are different concepts! (2) is a special case of (1). Anything you agree or disagree is meaningless if one of you is talking about (1) and the other is talking about (2). So what is this forum about, (1) or (2)? When you say you are attracted by "the Zettlekasten method," do you mean (1) or (2)? I don't think many people disagree with you if you mean Definition (1). Why you talk about "my zettelkasten," if you maintain a genetic index card system, you are not doing Zettlekasten in the Luhmann sense. At least, when you post, whether OP or as response, please specify which definition you are using, 1, 2, or 3, 4.

P.S.: I certainly don't mean that everyone should use the same definition of ZK in his posts. It's impossible and it actually enriches the discussions if people hold different interpretations. What I mean is, in communication, you should make it clear to the listener which version of ZK you are talking about.