I got frustrated with the state of things in the General Discussion thread and I decided to create a "structured thread". I'm wondering, if this works out, could we see more support for this kind of thing?
In the thread, we're limiting responses to "+1" and "-1", which has really helped keep things constructive, IMO. I understand there are reasons that the forum doesn't have this as a posting feature, but sometimes I wonder is we couldn't have a more structured discussion about controversial topics — especially in playtest threads and the like.
For now, I'm content to see how these self-moderated threads work out, but I want a place to discuss the potential of structured threads. I'd like to do that here.
So what do you all think? Could structured threads (even as an option) lead to a world where Ross and Liz don't have to babysit the forums 24/7?
If the forums did implement a +1/-1 feature, it might be interesting if you could actually see who voted up or down as a list — that's what we have now, except it crowds the thread. Letting people have their name tied to their opinion might help people resist the urge to make a whole post just tearing into another person. In a lot of cases, it suffices to say "I disagree".
I think it could work great if people adhere to the criteria at the beginning of the thread...
I think it could work great if people adhere to the criteria at the beginning of the thread...
That's true.
I wonder if perhaps we could get some enforcement, but that doesn't really go very far towards the goal of making the Mods work less. :(
Even so, it would be nice if you could define rules for a thread somehow. I'm of two minds. On the one hand, I don't want people gaming the boards or anything like that. On the other hand, I suspect that a few rules of engagement will put an end to the ragefest threads that seem to appear increasingly often.
Maybe we can start a trend of posting guidelines in the OP, and just police ourselves. It might help if the OP guidelines are reasonable, maybe we could flag people who are way off... but that might be going too far. That really depends on what the real moderators think, rather than self-appointed egoistic windbags like myself. :)
Not every thread needs structure, but I think some topics could really benefit from it.
I certainly don't consider your recent actions involving this subject, and the structured thread concept itself to be signs of egotism Lincoln. You've hit on a pretty good idea here. Now it's time to see if the board in general will maintain their maturity and follow the guidelines laid down.
So far so good it would appear. There are a few small breeches of the established protocol in the thread, but nothing major, and it's not devolving into quote exchanges or anything of the sort.
+1
were you out of town this week? i couldn't get to you on messenger.
What exactly do you mean by "structured" threads? Threads that only allow +1/-1 responses? If so, how would that differ from a poll?
Well, "responses" is the key. Everyone in that thread is allowed to post their own thoughts in detail. What's NOT allowed is to say "You're wrong here here and here." You can contradict people only by submitting your own solution.
I'm not sure that it is possible to reinforce that, or that it would work as anything other than a self-policing thing like we have now. But it's a new idea, and discussing it in the thread itself doesn't work, so I wanted to discuss it here.
I don't think you should jump on this right away, Gary. I think the key concept is a thread where people are limited in their ability to respond for contradiction only. That's like showing up to a potluck emptyhanded and griping about how the food sucks. The structured thread is like saying "You have to bring your own dish to get in the door." We'll see how that works out.
I also want to say, I don't think the guidelines I have in that thread are perfect or anything. I'd love to see other posters try setting guidelines in their OPs, and see if we can have creative solutions to keeping conversations constructive.
That's what I mean by "structured thread". It is awesome that we have threads where "anything goes" but those tend to allow one or two posters to dominate the conversation back and forth. A structured thread says: "Here is the content we are looking for". For example: "I want a readable thread with everyone's solutions for problem x".
If we can just promote a culture where OPs can declare a guideline and people stick to it because it helps, that's probably the best solution. Enforcement by Mods would certainly help, but that's also really heavy-handed and might not be necessary anyway.
Imagine if the "Worst/Best thing about Pathfinder" threads allowed only one post per user? Or if it allowed +1/-1 votes that didn't clutter the thread? Those would be different conversations. Better? I don't know, maybe.
I don't want to create work for the site developers, I'm more interested in getting the community to think about how we discuss topics constructively.
Ahh, OK, I thought maybe you were asking for something that could be enforced in code, and I couldn't figure out how we might do that.
Maybe some day, but for now, just a place to discuss constructive threadcraft.