I take it that the "Morning Coffee" will forever be "Late Afternoon Coffee" for me :)
On to the question:
-------------
I'm going to be criticized to hell for saying this, but I can't help it. This site reminds me of early Digg. And it's not a bad thing.
Early Digg was a place where people were being nice and active, trying to get acknowledged and encouraging discussion through whatever means possible. It quickly became something nobody expected. Because of it, they didn't know what to do with it. From what I recall, they had way too much hired staff so their finances were on the low, which is why they had to try to find ways to monetize - their approach was to try and appease the corporations.
This is why when I came here I asked how are the admins going to try to cope with the large influx of users.
I feel like the internet has matured a lot since the early Digg age and I really wish to see what this style of community can produce with people that have already gone through good and bad in the online environment and are fully capable of building upon it.
I love the fact that I came here while this place is growing and I think it's really important that we take our responsibility seriously - the way we shape this place is the way newcomers are going to see it.
------------
How do I want to see it? (radical ideals incoming - they are just ideas)
1. I wish the downvote button would be abolished. I see no point in it. If you like something, you just do. If you don't, you should go past it and ignore it, or report it if you find it offensive.
2. I wish discussions would have more priority over articles. I want this community to be driven by the ideas of others more than corporate articles (I know I'm a hypocrite for posting from my news feed, I'll work on fixing this - it just feels like I'm spamming if I start 20 conversations at once).
3. I would like the Tribes to have a democratic system where if a certain number of people vote on the demotion of one o...
I take it that the "Morning Coffee" will forever be "Late Afternoon Coffee" for me :)
On to the question:
-------------
I'm going to be criticized to hell for saying this, but I can't help it. This site reminds me of early Digg. And it's not a bad thing.
Early Digg was a place where people were being nice and active, trying to get acknowledged and encouraging discussion through whatever means possible. It quickly became something nobody expected. Because of it, they didn't know what to do with it. From what I recall, they had way too much hired staff so their finances were on the low, which is why they had to try to find ways to monetize - their approach was to try and appease the corporations.
This is why when I came here I asked how are the admins going to try to cope with the large influx of users.
I feel like the internet has matured a lot since the early Digg age and I really wish to see what this style of community can produce with people that have already gone through good and bad in the online environment and are fully capable of building upon it.
I love the fact that I came here while this place is growing and I think it's really important that we take our responsibility seriously - the way we shape this place is the way newcomers are going to see it.
------------
How do I want to see it? (radical ideals incoming - they are just ideas)
1. I wish the downvote button would be abolished. I see no point in it. If you like something, you just do. If you don't, you should go past it and ignore it, or report it if you find it offensive.
2. I wish discussions would have more priority over articles. I want this community to be driven by the ideas of others more than corporate articles (I know I'm a hypocrite for posting from my news feed, I'll work on fixing this - it just feels like I'm spamming if I start 20 conversations at once).
3. I would like the Tribes to have a democratic system where if a certain number of people vote on the demotion of one of the leaders, he'd be taken away from his position (this is inspired by Reddit's mostly corrupt system).
4. I love the achievements idea, seeing my name in the right hand side of the screen really motivates me to post more and have more articulate opinions on what I'm writing about. I feel like it would be amazing if there could be some monthly awards for it too.
-------------
Those are my extreme ideas, they are meant to spark discussions, especially telling me why I'm wrong. Looking forward to it.
I think down votes are essential for the community to self moderate as a whole against spammers and trolls... if used correctly. I doubt the down votes are going anywhere especially since the admins even took the time to improve on those by adding the down vote reason selection functionality not too long ago.
I think down votes are essential for the community to self moderate as a whole against spammers and trolls... if used correctly. I doubt the down votes are going anywhere especially since the admins even took the time to improve on those by adding the down vote reason selection functionality not too long ago.
In addition, considering the complexity of the comments in a multi-tribe setting for discussion, down votes become ever more essential for the community to self govern from spammers and trolls. I guess the question we should ask ourselves is. How does one moderate a snap that has been posted into multiple tribes? Which chief and set of moderators should be assigned to the task? Should it be the teams from all tribes? Should it be the content poster? Or should it be the community? This is definitely a topic I feel is worthy of discussion.
I agree, but I do think that they should not affect someone's rep if no reason is given. This may help with downvotes just given for disagreeing with a person's position.
I think it's vital that Team Snapzu has a vision for the site, along with contingency plans for problems that every successful predecessor has faced. We need to do our best to learn from their mistakes. I agree that early-adopters here have a responsibility to shape the community for the future.
1. I wonder the same thing about downvotes. I think I will bring that up in tomorrow's Morning Coffee.
2. Discussions are great, but it's a big ask for users to come up with interesting topics all the time. External content provides something to talk about, and discussion can flourish within the comments. I think that's probably the most natural way, as it's the easiest. Quality discussion posts will be little gems among everything else, and they'll stand out for that reason. Certain tribes will also be more discussion-focused (they may even be limited to such posts), and that's where you and I could hang out.
3. I agree that there should be a way to handle problematic chiefs and moderators, but do you think voting is the best way?
3. I agree that there should be a way to handle problematic chiefs and moderators, but do you think voting is the best way?
Maybe? Since I have yet to see a forum where there was a reliable mechanism to remove power-mad moderators, I couldn't say if this idea would work or not.
I take it that the "Morning Coffee" will forever be "Late Afternoon Coffee" for me :)
On to the question:
-------------
I'm going to be criticized to hell for saying this, but I can't help it. This site reminds me of early Digg. And it's not a bad thing.
Early Digg was a place where people were being nice and active, trying to get acknowledged and encouraging discussion through whatever means possible. It quickly became something nobody expected. Because of it, they didn't know what to do with it. From what I recall, they had way too much hired staff so their finances were on the low, which is why they had to try to find ways to monetize - their approach was to try and appease the corporations.
This is why when I came here I asked how are the admins going to try to cope with the large influx of users. I feel like the internet has matured a lot since the early Digg age and I really wish to see what this style of community can produce with people that have already gone through good and bad in the online environment and are fully capable of building upon it.
I love the fact that I came here while this place is growing and I think it's really important that we take our responsibility seriously - the way we shape this place is the way newcomers are going to see it.
------------
How do I want to see it? (radical ideals incoming - they are just ideas)
1. I wish the downvote button would be abolished. I see no point in it. If you like something, you just do. If you don't, you should go past it and ignore it, or report it if you find it offensive.
2. I wish discussions would have more priority over articles. I want this community to be driven by the ideas of others more than corporate articles (I know I'm a hypocrite for posting from my news feed, I'll work on fixing this - it just feels like I'm spamming if I start 20 conversations at once).
3. I would like the Tribes to have a democratic system where if a certain number of people vote on the demotion of one o...
... Read FullI think down votes are essential for the community to self moderate as a whole against spammers and trolls... if used correctly. I doubt the down votes are going anywhere especially since the admins even took the time to improve on those by adding the down vote reason selection functionality not too long ago.
In addition, considering the complexity of the comments in a multi-tribe setting for discussion, down votes become ever more essential for the community to self govern from spammers and trolls. I guess the question we should ask ourselves is. How does one moderate a snap that has been posted into multiple tribes? Which chief and set of moderators should be assigned to the task? Should it be the teams from all tribes? Should it be the content poster? Or should it be the community? This is definitely a topic I feel is worthy of discussion.
I agree, but I do think that they should not affect someone's rep if no reason is given. This may help with downvotes just given for disagreeing with a person's position.
[This comment was removed]
Good idea.
I'm seeing downvotes starting to be used as "I disagree" rather than "this is a bad submission or comment." Do we just live with it?
No system is perfect. Luckily the underlaying functionality was built to mitigate this type of behaviour.
So we just live with it for now. All right. :)
Great points.
I think it's vital that Team Snapzu has a vision for the site, along with contingency plans for problems that every successful predecessor has faced. We need to do our best to learn from their mistakes. I agree that early-adopters here have a responsibility to shape the community for the future.
1. I wonder the same thing about downvotes. I think I will bring that up in tomorrow's Morning Coffee.
2. Discussions are great, but it's a big ask for users to come up with interesting topics all the time. External content provides something to talk about, and discussion can flourish within the comments. I think that's probably the most natural way, as it's the easiest. Quality discussion posts will be little gems among everything else, and they'll stand out for that reason. Certain tribes will also be more discussion-focused (they may even be limited to such posts), and that's where you and I could hang out.
3. I agree that there should be a way to handle problematic chiefs and moderators, but do you think voting is the best way?
Maybe? Since I have yet to see a forum where there was a reliable mechanism to remove power-mad moderators, I couldn't say if this idea would work or not.
Perhaps instead of a downvote, a "Report to moderator" instead?
I really like this idea. I wish I had more than one upvote to give it.