Creating a "maturing" forum!

[Doctordick]

Idsoftwaresteve has moved me to open another thread. He has made a comment on the “What is time?” thread which opens some very important issues which essentially have nothing to do with that thread (except for suggesting an improvement in presentation; which that thread does need).

Just one more thing and I'm done. I wish we had some tools to go back over this thread and somehow tie things together with other threads. I guess I'm talking about a manual abstraction process where we can 'back out' and look for patterns in arguments, etc.

 

In other words, threads could be of two basic types: initial discussions covering a wide set of views - and mature threads, meaning, the thread has been analyzed and integrated into other structures. I'm not smart enough to do that so somebody else can think about it, ok? :)

You have touched upon a very important issue. I agree very much that such alterations in the structure of the forum should be possible and would do a lot to improve communications. If I were in charge of developing the software behind these forums, there are a number of facilities I would include which I think would go a long way towards “maturing” the thread.

 

Most all forums allow one to “ignore” other contributors but this is not a useful power as it does not remove immature comments from the view of anyone except the people who really aren't seriously bothered. On the other hand, one really should not allow removal of such comments because no one should want to allow other people to control what they can see. So I would suggest another view mode where special views would be possible; one could call the mode “John's view” where the user “John” would be the user who thought these were the important posts to a thread.

 

If one allowed a member to attach his user name to posts he thought were important and then allow the reader to look at those posts it could begin to generate the kind of thing Idsoftwaresteve is talking about. Add the capability to look at things that pleased a number of users by a logical combination (an “and” or an “or” selection). If someone specified a specific post as involved in his perspective of the thread, his name could be listed at the end of the post and clicking on his name could alter the view to the supposed more mature view. It could also add in links which that person felt were significantly related.

 

Now all this is no more than suggestion. Perhaps others could provide more intelligent mechanisms to achieve the results Idsoftwaresteve brings up. Or, we could start another section of the forum devoted to forum design. People who are actually working on the problems of forum design could comment on their problems with such changes. One could also use such a section as a test case to see what kinds of problems arise.

 

It would be nice if such advances in forum design could be achieved.

 

Have fun -- Dick

[C1ay]

Notice from the credits at the bottom of the page that we use vBulletin forum software. They operate their own forum there on the software itself if you have suggestions you'd like to make on software features.

[nutronjon]

Idsoftwaresteve has moved me to open another thread. He has made a comment on the “What is time?” thread which opens some very important issues which essentially have nothing to do with that thread (except for suggesting an improvement in presentation; which that thread does need).

You have touched upon a very important issue. I agree very much that such alterations in the structure of the forum should be possible and would do a lot to improve communications. If I were in charge of developing the software behind these forums, there are a number of facilities I would include which I think would go a long way towards “maturing” the thread.

 

Most all forums allow one to “ignore” other contributors but this is not a useful power as it does not remove immature comments from the view of anyone except the people who really aren't seriously bothered. On the other hand, one really should not allow removal of such comments because no one should want to allow other people to control what they can see. So I would suggest another view mode where special views would be possible; one could call the mode “John's view” where the user “John” would the user who thought these were the important posts to a thread.

 

If one allowed a member to attach his user name to posts he thought were important and then allow the reader to look at those posts it could begin to generate the kind of thing Idsoftwaresteve is talking about. Add the capability to look at things that pleased a number of users by a logical combination (an “and” or an “or” selection). If someone specified a specific post as involved in his perspective of the thread, his name could be listed at the end of the post and clicking on his name could alter the view to the supposed more mature view. It could also add in links which that person felt were significantly related.

 

Now all this is no more than suggestion. Perhaps others could provide more intelligent mechanisms to achieve the results Idsoftwaresteve brings up. Or, we could start another section of the forum devoted to forum design. People who are actually working on the problems of forum design could comment on their problems with such changes. One could also use such a section as a test case to see what kinds of problems arise.

 

It would be nice if such advances in forum design could be achieved.

 

Have fun -- Dick

 

How about allowing the person who starts a thread, to control the thread? We could view the threads as owned by asuthors of them, like Wikipedia is open to all but edited. What would make the owner of threads good owners, is their reputation. If they unwisely elementated comments, they would become unpopular. Good thread editors would become popular.

[modest]

I've moved this thread to the suggestions and wish list forum as it has nothing to do with the philosophy of science but is indeed a forum suggestion.

 

~modest

[Tormod]

It is a very interesting suggestion.

[C1ay]

How about allowing the person who starts a thread, to control the thread?

 

That could be useful for people that only want to have discussions with other people that agree with them but it would be a hindrance to serious debate.

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

Originally Posted by nutronjon- How about allowing the person who starts a thread, to control the thread? We could view the threads as owned by asuthors of them, like Wikipedia is open to all but edited. What would make the owner of threads good owners, is their reputation. If they unwisely elementated comments, they would become unpopular. Good thread editors would become popular.

You already have this feature with several options...

1st option- politely ask persons not taking you're thread seriously to do so (kindly stick to the topic).

2nd. slap a warning on them via PM.

3rd. slap them with Neg Rep when they fail to cooperate or if their behavior is similar in other threads.

4th. present you're issue with them to the powers that be here.

 

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve View Post

Just one more thing and I'm done. I wish we had some tools to go back over this thread and somehow tie things together with other threads.

You can always post links to similar or related threads with your posts.

 

In other words, threads could be of two basic types: initial discussions covering a wide set of views - and mature threads, meaning, the thread has been analyzed and integrated into other structures. I'm not smart enough to do that so somebody else can think about it, ok?

It doesn't seem all that complicated

to me...If this is something a person wanted to do it should be a simple matter of start a new thread, edit, cut, paste, quote, add more appropriate data.

 

Though it does sound like one heck of a good idea to have a more streamlined method and a means of segregating these "mature" threads from those where anyone can post anything related or not. Kind of an evolving Hypo- reference library of sorts...without the sterility of a traditional reference repository...One of the things I love most about Hypo-Sci-Fo is the manner in which the members interact with each-other and approach the subject matter of threads...For example Turtle and Boeyzon are extremely good at the humerus approach, Buffy the cheshire cat approach (man she can be confusing!), etc. etc.. this is definitely a huge part of what makes Hypo-Sci-Fo an enjoyable place to be IMHO.

[Doctordick]

I have posted here again because the problem I tried to discuss has come up once more in the new “What is "space-time" really?” thread.

... give that so many posts were just capricious, witty, opinionated... not actually scientifically astute dialogue on what "time" is. Granted, any such contributions (or all of them) were lost in the pile of less-than-serious-or intelligent replies.

The problem is at the very base of having a clear discussion.

I've moved this thread to the suggestions and wish list forum as it has nothing to do with the philosophy of science but is indeed a forum suggestion.

It has everything to do with the philosophy of science as the central issue of “science” is the clarity of communication.

You already have this feature with several options...

The options you suggest are not useful as they require the cooperation of the “disturbing” people.

 

As I said in my opening post,

Most all forums allow one to “ignore” other contributors but this is not a useful power as it does not remove immature comments from the view of anyone except the people who really aren't seriously bothered. On the other hand, one really should not allow removal of such comments because no one should want to allow other people to control what they can see. So I would suggest another view mode where special views would be possible; one could call the mode “John's view” where the user “John” would be the user who thought these were the important posts to a thread.

What I was proposing is, from a logical perspective (that would be from a programing perspective), quite easy to achieve and I suspect very effective at creating an extremely mature forum. All it really requires is easy adjustment of that ignore list together with an easy way to share such a list.

 

The forum already has the ability to enforce an editable “ignore list”. If every thread were to have, attached to it, a specific ignore list (a list editable by the person who created that specific thread) together with the ability of the reader to use or not use that ignore list (which could be implemented by a button on the title or perhaps a membership qualification), the consequences could easily be earth shaking. The result would be exactly analogous to moving “academy discussions” (and, here, I am thinking of the structure of Plato's public discussions in the “orchard”) to class room discussions in a modern university (such an ignore list would serve exactly the same purpose as the doors of a classroom). If you decided to push the button, you would be in the class room; if you didn't you could listen at the window (so to speak) and could hear all the comments in the classroom together with any comments from those not in the classroom.

 

Notice that everyone already has the option of making their own ignore list so those, listening at the window, can block out comments that they themselves find bothersome. If they decide they would like to be removed from the thread's ignore list, they could send a private message to the thread's “owner” with a request to allowed into the classroom: i.e., expressing a desire to be heard by the "members of the class".

 

This forum apparently has a very similar constraint imposed on the lounge section implemented by the dis-allowance of posts: i.e., anyone can read the threads but only some can post. All I am suggesting is, anyone can read and/or post but where “members” of the class can ignore these extraneous posts. Perhaps it could be implemented by a (everyone is ignored unless on the list) category; it might require shorter lists.

 

If that could be implemented, one might implement an ignore list attached to individual posts editable by the poster. That would allow private conversations which could be overheard (read) by others but not interfered with by people without anything to contribute. I suspect this possibility would create a new and powerful possibility not available in a classic classroom situation: essentially it could create the possibility of substructured classroom within the classroom though it does create some subtle and/or problems with regard to that "ignore list".

 

Such a structural addition to the forum would go a long way towards achieving a “mature” forum. I suspect the result would be very analogous to the structure of intellectual interchange on a university campus with the additional benefit that anyone could listen to any discussion.

 

Just trying to bring rationality to these discussions.

 

Have fun -- Dick

[freeztar]

The problem with this approach is that the ignore feature is for users rather than individual posts. To change this, I would imagine that it would have to be implemented at the vBulletin level. Perhaps you should make a request for such a feature at their forums?

[DFINITLYDISTRUBD]

The options you suggest are not useful as they require the cooperation of the “disturbing” people.

I can't help but think the choice of wording was very much intentional:jab:

[modest]

I agree with freeztar. I don't think there would be any real way to implement what Doctordick is saying without some fundamental changes to the vBulletin software. It very-well might be something they would be interested in—they are continually adding features to the software.

 

It might be worth it then, Doctordick, to suggest your idea at the vBulletin forums like Freezy says.

 

~modest

[Doctordick]

I just happened to notice that the number of views of this thread has at this very moment gone to 666, a rather unique number. :) At the same time I thought to read the last post and a question came up in my mind

The problem with this approach is that the ignore feature is for users rather than individual posts. To change this, I would imagine that it would have to be implemented at the vBulletin level. Perhaps you should make a request for such a feature at their forums?

How is the feature implemented in the “lounge”? It seems to me that the same feature could be attached to any specific thread and would accomplish almost exactly what I had in mind.

 

Have fun -- Dick

[freeztar]

How is the feature implemented in the “lounge”? It seems to me that the same feature could be attached to any specific thread and would accomplish almost exactly what I had in mind.

I believe you are referring to user flags. In other words, members with an editorial staff user flag can see and access the editor forum, whereas those members without the flag never even see the forum.

 

As they work right now, user flags are forum wide. I don't think they can be used for specific threads. To use flags to accomplish what you want, every user would need the ability to flag individual threads. These flags could be user specific or they could be universal. Either way, this would have to be added to vBulletin as that functionality does not exist at this time (to the best of my knowledge).

 

The closest thing we have right now is thread voting. Unfortunately, most people never use this feature, so it is a far cry from what you would like to see.

[Doctordick]

I believe you are referring to user flags. In other words, members with an editorial staff user flag can see and access the editor forum, whereas those members without the flag never even see the forum.

I don't think we are talking about the same thing here. I have somewhat backed off what I was originally proposing towards what can be achieved via whatever mechanism lies behind the lounge forum. I can see the lounge forum and can read any post there but I can not post there as "I do not have the privileges to access this page". This is quite close to one very important aspect of what I originally proposed”

Most all forums allow one to “ignore” other contributors but this is not a useful power as it does not remove immature comments from the view of anyone except the people who really aren't seriously bothered. On the other hand, one really should not allow removal of such comments because no one should want to allow other people to control what they can see. So I would suggest another view mode where special views would be possible; one could call the mode “John's view” where the user “John” would be the user who thought these were the important posts to a thread.

If it were possible to have more then one such “lounge” where who could post was controlled; say a set of “subject classroom” areas such as I spoke of in post #8 of this thread.

The result would be exactly analogous to moving “academy discussions” (and, here, I am thinking of the structure of Plato's public discussions in the “orchard”) to class room discussions in a modern university (such an ignore list would serve exactly the same purpose as the doors of a classroom). If you decided to push the button, you would be in the class room; if you didn't you could listen at the window (so to speak) and could hear all the comments in the classroom together with any comments from those not in the classroom.

One could have an “outside” area with each “classroom” area where interested people not “in the classroom” could make whatever comments they might desire while, inside the classroom, people making immature and disturbing comments could be excluded. Those in the “outside” area could still quote people in the classroom if they wished as I can still quote from the lounge even though I am not allowed to post there:

hey there rascal,

as this forums moderator, you know...the bartender... i feel compelled to let you know that there is already a thread about total field theory started in the lounge already!

maybe this thread is different, i dont know! Im just the guy.

anyways, if you didnt know it was there...you should check it out.

and i will gleefully burn this thread to the ground, amidst.

Such a thing would go a long way towards building structure into the forum; the kind of structure found in any educational system.

Notice that everyone already has the option of making their own ignore list so those, listening at the window, can block out comments that they themselves find bothersome.

If they wanted to take part in the “classroom” discussion, they could request admittance just as they currently must in order to post in the lounge.

 

Such a structural addition to the forum would go a long way towards achieving a “mature” forum. I suspect the result would be very analogous to the structure of intellectual interchange in classroom of a university campus with the additional benefit that anyone could listen to any discussion.

The closest thing we have right now is thread voting. Unfortunately, most people never use this feature, so it is a far cry from what you would like to see.

I guess I am ignorant of “thread voting”. Where could I find information about it?

 

Just trying to bring order and rationality to these discussions.

 

Have fun -- Dick

[freeztar]

I think I understand. I'm torn on the idea though. On one hand, it could improve the quality of discussion. On the other hand, it seems somewhat arrogant, or "high brow".

 

Are you aware of a forum that operates like this, DD? It would be interesting to see how it works out.

 

As far as getting this noticed by the dev team, which are the members responsible for site design and implementation, I recommend using the feedback forum or request a new feature using the bug tracker.

 

To rate a thread, click on the "rate this thread" button which can be found in the top right corner of the first post in any thread. You then can select a star rating (1-5). The average of all votes is shown in the forum view, to the right of the thread titles. I know its not even close to what you are requesting, but it's the closest thing Hypography has for members to quickly judge the quality of a thread. If everyone used this system, it would provide a good general indicator of discussion quality, imho.

[modest]

A member could create an invite-only social group that I suppose could be made to function as Dr. Dick says.

 

~modest

[Tormod]

Yes, the social groups is basically vBulletin's built-in attempt to solve what DD is referring to.

 

As for the lounge, every member with more than 25 posts can join - simply follow the instructions in the sticky post at the top of the Lounge forum.