BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Policy & Help >

Adjunct to STATEMENT OF INTENT

  
 
Tom Coates
09:47 / 26.11.01
Ok. no promises on this one, but I'm talking to someone who's got to build some community software for a university project about custom building something for barbelith, and if this goes ahead it will be pretty radically different - it might be better it might be worse.

One of the things that we're thrashing out at the moment is how one might be able to faciliate the promotion of really interesting threads so that people can come and experience the cream without feeling bogged down by the community stuff and the chat if they don't want to.

One way we've been talking about it makes it possible to vote for threads that they are enjoying and make those more visible - you might go to the front page of the site to see what the actual discussions might be that are happening, rather than go through to the board. And yuo wouldn't get all of it - only a filtered sample. This might shift the angle back towards discussion of THINGS rather than just conversation. It might not. It might wreck everything. You never know.

Another angle I've been talking about is one in which there are two or three filtered versions of the board, so that you can operate at one level and experience only the most stimulating discussion and debate - or you could decide to get the full unfiltered experience of randomness, anarchy and mess. And neither board would be more 'important', but one would fit within another. So you could effectively decide at what level you wanted to participate in.

One of the things I'm really interested in building in is some way of limiting the impact of the occasional idiots we get on the site.

And another thing I'm seriously considering is finding a way to more intelligently run moderators - and have an automatic way of highlighting posts by people who write consistently interesting and thrilling things. So for example, moderators abilities may be available to everyone (in a truncated sense) but in a fashion that directly relates both to how well their posts and threads are responded to, and how well people think they're handling the 'job' of moderator. informal and automatic elections may be run as well, so that responsibilities (and powers) move and change between people more fluidly.

It might be possible to have a front page that actually only showed five threads from each of the major thinking and discussion forums - all voted up there by people who are actually INVOLVED in those forums (you might get the ability to say 'this is a great post for The Laboratory' if you've posted twenty times in that forum and if those posts have been well received by otehr people).

My biggest - and potentially least popular - thought at the moment is to hack barbelith down the middle and move the community somewhere else entirely. If people were interested that is. It's occured to me that the whole board might sit better at its own unique URL - like subbacultcha.com or something. It might clarify the shift in perspective, and maybe allow the Grant specific elements to shine uniquely.

Basically, I don't know if any of this will ever happen, but it's a serious consideration. And I think people should start bashing some ideas around (none of which I will promise to implement) because at some basic form the FUNCTIONING of a board like this is like the functioning infrastructure of a government. And what we want to do is find a way to keep this place ticking over in an effective way, stimulate ALL of us, produce something glorious, and do it in such a way that it most adequately expresses some of our political dispositions and ideas about how the world should operate.

So get to it kids. THINK. PUZZLE. MAKE UP STUPID IDEAS. And we'll steal the best ones and claim them as our own...
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:47 / 26.11.01
Okay - first impressions only...

Originally posted by Tom Coates:
One way we've been talking about it makes it possible to vote for threads that they are enjoying and make those more visible - you might go to the front page of the site to see what the actual discussions might be that are happening, rather than go through to the board. And yuo wouldn't get all of it - only a filtered sample.

YES. GOOD IDEA.

Another angle I've been talking about is one in which there are two or three filtered versions of the board, so that you can operate at one level and experience only the most stimulating discussion and debate - or you could decide to get the full unfiltered experience of randomness, anarchy and mess. And neither board would be more 'important', but one would fit within another. So you could effectively decide at what level you wanted to participate in.

INTERESTING IDEA. (Can you really do that?)

One of the things I'm really interested in building in is some way of limiting the impact of the occasional idiots we get on the site.

GOOD IDEA. (Although would requite hard decisions, like where the line between "occasionally annoying person" and "idiot" lies...)

And another thing I'm seriously considering is finding a way to more intelligently run moderators - and have an automatic way of highlighting posts by people who write consistently interesting and thrilling things. So for example, moderators abilities may be available to everyone (in a truncated sense) but in a fashion that directly relates both to how well their posts and threads are responded to, and how well people think they're handling the 'job' of moderator. informal and automatic elections may be run as well, so that responsibilities (and powers) move and change between people more fluidly.

GOOD IDEA.

It might be possible to have a front page that actually only showed five threads from each of the major thinking and discussion forums - all voted up there by people who are actually INVOLVED in those forums (you might get the ability to say 'this is a great post for The Laboratory' if you've posted twenty times in that forum and if those posts have been well received by otehr people).

EXCELLENT IDEA. I like this one best of all.

My biggest - and potentially least popular - thought at the moment is to hack barbelith down the middle and move the community somewhere else entirely. If people were interested that is. It's occured to me that the whole board might sit better at its own unique URL - like subbacultcha.com or something. It might clarify the shift in perspective, and maybe allow the Grant specific elements to shine uniquely.

BAD IDEA. (I'll explain why when I'm not so tired - but I think you're right about this not being popular...)
 
 
Ronald Thomas Clontle
09:47 / 26.11.01

able to faciliate the promotion of really interesting threads so that people can come and experience the cream without feeling bogged down by the community stuff and the chat if they don't want to...

Well, I think the big question about this is exactly who is going to be on the council of town elders who make this call... ie, whose opinions matter more, who are the people choosing the people making all of the decisions, what do we do to make sure that the 'ruling class' don't get out of control with their editorial power...

Also, how are we going to be defining what is a 'stimulating debate' and what isn't? While there are plenty of threads which obviously are one or the other, what about all of the big threads that could go either way, particularly many threads in the spectacle and threads in the conversation which start out frivolous, but become serious?

And another thing I'm seriously considering is finding a way to more intelligently run moderators - and have an automatic way of highlighting posts by people who write consistently interesting and thrilling things.

Well, I think that is alienating for longtime posters and new posters alike... it's like grading, and I don't think it is fair to say "this poster is an A student, this one is a C student" etc. I think that is a fairly repugnant idea. People should be able to figure out who is saying smart things on their own, for their own reasons. It is condescending to say "Flyboy is a smart guy. He says smart things", especially if we don't all agree with him. It is insulting for those people who may not be spectacular posters to have their posts taken less seriously because the moderators don't happen to dig them. Highlighting posts and posters is just a bad idea, and would result in a lot of tension and resentment, and has enormous potential for corruption.

However if you insist on doing something like this, I think the very LAST thing elections for these moderator jobs should be is 'informal and automatic'.

I also think that it is very unwise to attempt to divorce the community/chat aspects of Barbelith from the substantial debates et al. The fact that a community has been built around the common interests discussed in the Revolution and the Spectacle is something to celebrate, not bemoan. People want to interact with the people who post the interesting things in the 'serious' forums, they want to get to know them. That is a good thing, especially for those people who are frustrated for not being able to have these sorts of people in their regular day-to-day life.

[ 26-11-2001: Message edited by: Flux = Wonderboy ]
 
 
mondo a-go-go
10:29 / 26.11.01
re: highlighting interesting posts. isn't that what the collective should be doing? regardless of how irregularly the collective peeps update their own blogs, it would definitely be a useful filter if people posted up interesting threads there with short comments. or am i the only one who even checks that page anymore?
 
 
Ronald Thomas Clontle
10:38 / 26.11.01
I agree, that would be a better idea, focusing on the Collective blogs.

I would love to be involved with that, hint hint.
 
 
Tom Coates
11:17 / 26.11.01
Sorting out the Barbelith Collective is something that I fully want to investigate at some stage in the future, but I can't really force people to use the collective weblog so at the moment I'm thinking around the matter more..

I simply don't accept that a new poster should have the same weight on the board as someone who everyone knows and trusts and thinks writes good stuff.

The question is however HOW you implement a system that predicts the interests of the board and promotes them. What we want is a process by which everyone feels engaged, everyone has the ability within a not-too-long stretch of time to be 'moderating' or whatever that's going to be, and in which it's still possible for people who aren't able to invest 110% in the community (like for example ME) to find it exciting and useful.

I'm quiet comfortable with the idea that the board might polarise a bit - making it very much easier for people who don't want to participate in the discussion to read stuff that interests them, and making those people who ARE involved ASPIRE to something.

Whether or not this works as a community is simply NOT all that matters any more. It's also got to have some more purpose. 9/11 gave us a tremendous shot in the arm in a way, but at the same time has exposed how much of the site is normally of actual interest to people who can't invest a couple of hours a day into it.

what I want to do is find a way to make the site more stimulating for the regulars and long-term posters, easier to dip into and out of for new-timers and lurkers, SELF-MAINTAINING, SELF-MODERATING and reflecting (and extending) the interests of the people involved in it.

I think these are noble aims. The question I am presenting you guys with is IF YOU WERE TO HAVE FREE REIGN TO PRODUCE A DIFFERENT FUNCTIONING COMMUNITY SITE - which will impact on every aspect, from how the posts look to how they work, to whether there are moderators, or to whether everyone has small moderation powers that cumulatively define the shape of the site - WHAT KIND OF THINGS WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE IMPLEMENTED.

Try and think of this as an exciting challenge and the next step in the site's transformation. If we can build a system that functions effectively as a truly anarchist community, then great - I'd love that. I'm not looking for more heirarchy, I'm looking for more DISTRIBUTED powers, I'm looking for a complete freedom to explore the site and read and reply to whatever you want, but in such a way that you can find WHAT YOU WANT quickly and easily.

So think of some damn ideas already.

And while we're at it, I can tell you right now that we're NEVER going to get full agreement on all of this stuff, and so some people are going (inevitably) to be pissed off. The way to AVOID being pissed off is to express all your concerns now AND SUGGEST ALTERNATIVE WAYS AROUND THE PROBLEMS.

I thank you...
 
 
Spatula Clarke
11:24 / 26.11.01
At the simplest level, I'd move the Revolution forums to the top of the main page and have the Conversation at the bottom. Back when there was no Conversation, the Help forum got used for the same purpose - that was the last forum on the page. I can't see that causing any argument, and it really could be that doing something that simple would shift the board's focus.

It's all about first impressions.
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
12:28 / 26.11.01
I think having something like a karma rating on the individual threads rather than on the posters themselves would be more successful. I can see how having the ability to highlight specific posters would be a good thing as some kind of shorthand for "good discussion" but I think it'd also foster the sort of alienation that Flux mentions - perhaps also to the point that some posters may feel unable to post in the occasional fluff threads due to their high scoring as a theorybitch.

So, maybe rate the threads? It's a bit redundant in one way - because popular threads will always be up the top of the forums, obviously - but it'd be good for threads that aren't on the first page, or haven't been answered for a while; one could see whether they're deemed by posters to be worth the time. Especially useful in multi-page threads, perhaps.

I guess you could open user comments or some kind of Epinionsesque "trusted poster" system, which'd enable people to nominate posters they thought were excellent (possibly a modification of the current buddy list function in the profile section?) - that'd allow people to say that on an individual basis, they like or are liked by x, y and z. It seems a bit more reasonable than a blank voting-type system, maybe, because people would be known, y'know?

If chat becomes an important part of the place, is it worthwhile looking into some java chat app, or somesuch? Provided it's not bandwidth heavy, this could take some of the heat out of the conversation, especially in some of the late-night post-pub postings?

The role of the collective: is it worth evaluating the relevance of same, as regards how the section interacts with the rest of the board? To be honest, I've not really examined them that often, as they just seem to be regular weblogs, mostly - and I know from the experience of having one that there's often more exciting stuff going on inside, y'know? What's the aim behind them? Whyfore? And so on. Not having a dig, but just wondering how they complement the site now that weblogs are pretty widespread? Personally, I think that if they're just fulfilling a basic "this is me and what I did" kind of thing, then maybe they should be reevaluated or nixed. Thoughts?

Perhaps worthwhile would be some kind of random thread selector thing, much like the random link button you've got on plasticbag, Tom? Give people the incentive to hit Barbelith and land somewhere unexpected, rather than look at the list of topics and go "shit!" - that'd also see more people shuffling through the back pages, too, perhaps?

E. Randy's got the right idea about the order in which things appear, too, I think. If the Conversation comes after the other sections of the UBB, surely people'll give more attention to the other sections first? People'll get to the involved topics first, then, I guess
 
 
mondo a-go-go
12:46 / 26.11.01
quote:Originally posted by Rothkoid:
I can see how having the ability to highlight specific posters would be a good thing as some kind of shorthand for "good discussion" but I think it'd also foster the sort of alienation that Flux mentions - perhaps also to the point that some posters may feel unable to post in the occasional fluff threads due to their high scoring as a theorybitch.

there's already that kind of vibe on here, and i thought that was one of the things we were trying to get away from?

quote:If chat becomes an important part of the place, is it worthwhile looking into some java chat app, or somesuch? Provided it's not bandwidth heavy, this could take some of the heat out of the conversation, especially in some of the late-night post-pub postings?

maybe you could put a permalink up to the "pocket barbelith" forum up on delphi, tom? they have chat applications up there, and people would probably use it if they could link off here.

quote:The role of the collective: is it worth evaluating the relevance of same, as regards how the section interacts with the rest of the board?
[....]
Personally, I think that if they're just fulfilling a basic "this is me and what I did" kind of thing, then maybe they should be reevaluated or nixed. Thoughts?

i agree.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
12:54 / 26.11.01
quote:Originally posted by Kooky is a bad scamp:
i agree. there's already that kind of vibe on here, and i thought that was one of the things we were trying to get away from?

But surely if everybody has the same ability to 'recommend' people, the danger of elitism is actually reduced: if people think there's a clique who are full of shite, they can studiously ignore them. Then again, we did get rid of the member rating stars for this very reason... Personally I'm with Rothkoid on being much more in favour of being able to recommend *threads*, for this reason and others.

Re: the Collective blogs. The main problem with these is that half of them are either never updated or extremely rarely updated (disclaimer: mine's been quiet recently but I did explain why on there). Not only does this make this section of the site look a bit... well, crap, but it also discourages those of us who are still updating our own blogs, hosted there, from adding to the 'collective' one...
 
 
grant
13:12 / 26.11.01
quote:Originally posted by E. Randy Dupre:
At the simplest level, I'd move the Revolution forums to the top of the main page and have the Conversation at the bottom. Back when there was no Conversation, the Help forum got used for the same purpose - that was the last forum on the page. I can't see that causing any argument, and it really could be that doing something that simple would shift the board's focus.

It's all about first impressions.

Just what I was thinking.
Make the footnotes the footnotes....
 
 
grant
13:41 / 26.11.01
quote:Originally posted by Flyboy:
Not only does this make this section of the site look a bit... well, crap, but it also discourages those of us who are still updating our own blogs, hosted there, from adding to the 'collective' one...


Yeah, I saw that happening with me right off and decided anything worth adding was worth putting on the main collective.

Not that I've been good with that lately.

On other matters: I'm very uncomfortable with rating members based on "usefulness" or "value of contribution". There are plenty of noise-generating users out there who occasionally come up with something radical, smart, or funny (even accidentally).

There are also some very laconic posters who have a knack for making every word count - even if it's mostly well-placed (subtle) sarcasm, lasting no longer than a line of text.

I think having moderators vote for "interesting" threads in some kind of a form that would display links to those threads out on the front page - that would be nice.
 
 
rizla mission
13:52 / 26.11.01
yes. I agree with Grant & E. Randy.

(I'm sorry about the rubbish-ness of my barbelith blog incidently - I'm just crap at blogging, I guess. I hate writing about myself and I don't have time or talent to come up with many interesting things to put on it.)
 
 
moriarty
14:36 / 26.11.01
I'd say Kooky and Randy are right on the ball, here. In addition, I'd like to point out that many of the most prominent, long standing members of the community are the ones providing the majority of the fluff, while some people who very rarely post have the goods.

What about having it so if you click on a person's name it will take you to their current favourite thread, or a list of their favourite threads?

And would it be possible to construct a "Classics" forum, where threads deemed to be absolutely stunning could be shuffled off to (not sure who would decide what's what, but still).
 
 
Foxxy Feminist Fury
15:04 / 26.11.01
Yeah, I think we need to be very careful about discouraging those who DON'T post all the time from posting at all because they're afraid their thoughts will be met with a bad grade.

I guess I just don't understand how this is really possible to pull off. Wouldn't everyone agree that rating a thread is an inherently subjective thing? And Tom, I think I know what you're going for here - you want less fluff and more substance, as that was the initial purpose of the board, but, bandwidth-eating as it was, the "Feuds" thread was in fact useful. Also conversation, while it does get its share of chatty free-for-all things, is helpful place to put things that don't go elsewhere.

I do think, though, the chat-fest could easily be moved to Pocket Barbelith or something similar. That may be a great way to cut your bandwidth and save the serious, thought-provoking stuff for here.

I don't think it will make a lick of difference if you move Conversation to the bottom. Well, maybe it will. I always go to "today's active topics" when I first get here - but I usually get on about 14 hours after the prior day's threads are zeroed out. Still, I'll be surprised if moving the conversation makes that much of a difference.

I am dead set against highlighting threads by certain members. That smacks of a elitism and a popularity contest that further serves to alienate and discourage new members from posting. No no no no.

-$.02
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
17:08 / 26.11.01
I like the idea of rating threads (as opposed to posters) And while all threads and posters are created equal (nobody is proposing limiting what anyone can post), I agree with Tom that not all content is equally worth reading. Rating a thread with many posters that is interesting, funny, worthwhile, or has even especially entertaining thread rot as a momentary break in the action will benefit the forum, the posters, and the readers. Not individual egos.

I also think that a rotating period of official Moderators may be a good idea. Say, 3 months as a moderator before a new one is elected by the general populace of the board and/or forum (no back-to-back terms would be a possible solution to the threat of popularity contests). This way no one person need get burned out, bored, or overloaded and each forum will regularly get a shot of new enthusiasm. In the above scenario moderators would not only 'moderate' their forums but would also come up with ideas for new threads, stimulate conversation within the threads (without monopolizing or hijacking the threads), and basically keep their forum running smoothly without stepping on creativity or free speech.

I also agree with moving the conversation to the bottom of the list.

[ 26-11-2001: Message edited by: Lothar Tuppan ]
 
 
The Knowledge +1
19:46 / 26.11.01
If it aint broke don't try to fix it.

Umh, but I'm all for promoting the site and making it more user-friendly. And maybe more of a revolutionary thing. A Trend-setting site if you like.
 
 
Ronald Thomas Clontle
23:34 / 26.11.01
I can't help but get the sense that a lot of the things Tom is proposing come a very snobbish, elitist, ivory tower perspective on what a community should be... I think that the system that currently exists is very laissez-faire, and is probably as fair as this system could be -- the administrators and moderators do a minimum of policing, people behave themselves, there is an abnormally low number of trolls and jackasses, probably because the site gives off an impression that we are all too smart and civil to be fucked with, and that's likely true.

I think that any attempt to 'highlight' any threads would be too subjective to work in any way other than to promote someone's personal vision of what the overall community should be, and insult those people and threads which apparently aren't 'smart' and 'cool' enough to be deemed worthy of spotlight.

It's a bad idea to go down this road.

I'm with the guy (E. Randy?) who said to move the conversation forum to bottom of the list. good call. a subtle push towards the revolution area is better than shouting "READ THIS BECAUSE WE THINK WE KNOW WHAT IS GOOD FOR YOU". Let people make those decisions for themselves...I can't imagine intelligent adults (those people who I assume you'd want to attract) would really like being condescended to in that way. For example, I think forcing things from the Magik forum down people's throats is a bad idea, because NEWSFLASH most people in this world think that's a bunch of pretentious mumbo jumbo - not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's off-putting to lots of folks. Let people decide what they think is interesting on their own...

I think that maybe the best step in this is remodeling the TODAY's ACTIVE TOPICS section, and splitting it up into a few sections:

at the top,

TODAY'S ACTIVE TOPICS: REVOLUTION (including the creation forum)

next:

TODAY'S ACTIVE TOPICS: SPECTACLE

next:

TODAY'S ACTIVE TOPICS: BARBELITH (conversation, help, policy, gathering)

then:

THIS WEEK'S (or MONTH?) ACTIVE TOPICS:

all 'hot topics' from the past week, ie any thread longer than one page.

I think this would make the site a bit more clear - I think that the ACTIVE TOPICS link should be made more prominant too.
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
23:34 / 26.11.01
Phew, Flux posted so I don't really have to (yet I am anyway), in terms of rating stuff in the forums for any reason although I can see why Tom wants to do it and is a force for good in the universe I think it could quite easily put people off, then we have the whole situation we had with rating actual posters all over again.
 
 
pacha perplexa
23:34 / 26.11.01
quote:Originally posted by Rizla Year Zero:
yes. I agree with Grant & E. Randy.

Me too. If there´s something to be rated, let it be the threads.

I´d write much more here if it wasn´t for the difficulty I have with posting in english. It requires effort for both formulating my thoughts and trying to find the right words in this language. So I often don´t post because it takes time (looking up in the dictionary, etc...). Point is: as a member, I´d be considered kinda useless, if you catch my meaning.

It´s scary.
 
 
Tom Coates
10:03 / 27.11.01
Ok - this is interesting. Thread rating seems to be popular. Hmmm. I'll think more.
________________

Do you know what would happen if the conversation were further down the page? Crap would be posted in the other forums. That simple.

No one wants to shove anything down anyone's throats - and I think you're missing the point of a community if you think that no self-policing either goes on or should go on.

I'm not looking for a way for the regulars to filter through the stuff that they want to read. I'm looking for a way that other people can find something interesting on the site WITHOUT being a five hours a day person. Because it seems to me that without some input of people interested in the subjects that are VERY OCCASIONALLY discussed, then the whole board will become a social club for people bored at work. And while I think we all like having that aspect, it is not and should not be what the board is about.

And if you want to knwo what I think about people 'finding out what they think is interesting on their own' then I'll tell you. A VERY small percentage of hte threads here are goign to be of interest to a random punter off the street - I just would like it so that the threads they DID see were chosen in some way BY the community as a good reflection of themselves.
 
 
mondo a-go-go
11:00 / 27.11.01
i think flux's more visible highlighting of active topics sounds eminently workable
 
 
Naked Flame
11:54 / 27.11.01
Hmmmm.... plenty to chew on...

I'd agree with the people who thought it would be a good idea to host the chatty fluffy bits of the 'Lith separately. I'm quite sure that the Conversation chews up the lion's share of the bandwidth in here. Plea, tho- give us the option of chat, sure, but a BB too... i nearly wet myself laughing at the jokers in the Barbefeuds thread and it'd be a shame for posterity to lose such gems...

Threadrating is definitely better than peoplerating.

Do we still need 9/11? Aren't those issues better dealt with now in a wider context? Last I looked that forum was quietening down anyway...
 
 
Spatula Clarke
11:57 / 27.11.01
quote:Originally posted by Tom Coates:
Do you know what would happen if the conversation were further down the page? Crap would be posted in the other forums. That simple.

I don't agree, but if even if that were the case, well, that's what we've got moderators for.

The forums aren't free from crap solely because the Conversation exists, but also because moderators move topics that are generally agreed to be in the wrong place.

As for bringing certain topics to everyone's attention, how about this. We introduce a method of topic rating, similar to the Member Ratings that we had a while back. We have a page that contains links to the most highly-rated topics - much like the 'today's active topics' page - and one link to the board in full, and we make that page the first one that anyone coming to the Underground is presented with. Ratings aren't enabled for threads within the Conversation, encouraging people to start topics in the correct forum.

[ 27-11-2001: Message edited by: E. Randy Dupre ]
 
 
Spatula Clarke
12:10 / 27.11.01
Also, is there any way that moderators can be given the power to move threads into the forums they're responsible for, rather than just out of them.

Topics are always being started up in the Conversation that would probably serve the board better within the Head Shop or the Switchboard, but until you see them yourself, Tom, they have to stay in the Conversation. There have been a couple of times that I've seen threads in the Conversation that I would have liked to have moved into the Music, but I've had to watch as they become rotted because of their placing.

The most recent example that I can think of is the first couple of 9/11 threads. One started up in the Switchboard, another began in the Conversation. The Switchboard one quickly got abandoned as it became obvious that everyone was reading and posting to its rival, despite the fact that the Switcboard, strictly speaking, is where it belonged.
 
 
Tom Coates
12:54 / 27.11.01
The moderation thing interests me. What I might actually do is open it up a little, on the basis that the people who are moderators are all decent people.

Everyone who currently moderates will be able to moderate The Conversation as well. That's a start.
 
 
Tom Coates
13:02 / 27.11.01
Ah. unfortunately, there is a limit on the number of moderators for each forum... I'll open it up to people who current moderate the revolution to start off with...
 
 
mondo a-go-go
13:19 / 27.11.01
er...some of the forums in the revolution don't have moderators. on t'other hand, e randy, rothkoid (and myself) have all posted to this thread with some interest
 
 
Ronald Thomas Clontle
13:38 / 27.11.01
a few ideas/thoughts:

* I'm very fond of the idea of a "Classic Barbelith" area, made of closed threads that there is a concensus opion that they are great threads worthy of notice, and represent the community at its best. I think this would serve Tom's desire to show off our greatest hits rather well.

* I'm not crazy about the idea of separating the conversation/chat aspects from the site... I've been down this road before. I was involved in another net community that was built around a disc.server bbs system, and obviously those aren't set up for multiconferencing, and people would flip out if folks went off topic...this led to people setting up other disc.server boards for all sorts of uses, and it kinda became like a huge cluster of independent boards with a central hub of the main board to connect it all as a larger community. This led to a steady dilution of the community as a whole over the time this condition snowballed... it really ruined everything. The main general conversation area became at odds with the main site, folks chose allegiances, and everything split up, things got less and less civil. Now, I'll be the first to admit that the majority of those people were crazy, but overextending the community into different territories just seems like an awful idea to me....things are much better off being centralized in one location, on one application. Real time chat is silly. If any of us want to do that, we can just IM each other or something.

* I was thinking last night about how we could expand the Today's Active Topics into a recommended reading/listening list updated weekly with links to the books/cds which were prominant topics at Amazon... I understand that ordering books etc from the Barbelink to Amazon in some way helps this board, am I right?
Either which way, encouraging folks to look up the things we're discussing if they aren't already is a good thing. We can do the same for articles on websites that are vital to the discussions at hand... sure, a lot of this already happens in the threads anyway, but having it be a weekly feature calls more attention to the books and the threads too...
 
 
Ellis
20:08 / 29.11.01
Probably mentioned already, but link to the Delphi forum chatroom.

Might cut down on threads in the conversation. Doubt it though.
 
  
Add Your Reply