Re: Sum-up: Re-proposal: web forums
Mailing lists are searchable, but harder than a forum to search. Forums let you search by any of text, title, author, date, category,
Ok, that sounds nice.
The 'category' thing sounds tricky to implement on top of a mailing list (as I would like it)... Yes, categories are nice.
You can't cancel or edit posts. Forum moderators can delete spam posts.
That's just a horrible feature. As with any kind of censorship it will do nothing but make people suspect you for deleting legitimate posts. There've been forums like that, but they die quickly. Only forums with trustworthy admins get popular. So that's generally not a problem.
Spam should be removed (or maybe categorized under 'spam') by a spam filter. And if one does slip through, it will disappear in the noise in no time. Aren't most forums like about 30.000 pages long? Would you ever notice anything like a single spam mail? Yes, most people do notice them, because even popular fast moving forums aren't noisy - they lists thread titles instead of posts. It's a lot more concise that way - you don't get bured in posts. For some reason spammers never post in existing threads, they always create new ones. And at every active forum I've seen, their posts always get noticed, reported, and moved or removed.
Hi all, Having been on a lot of forums and mailing lists, I definitely prefer mailing lists. I've read the various pros and cons of both with interest here. Frankly, I've never found it a problem to do everything people say is great with forums with mailing lists -- and I do a lot of traveling and frequently do not have access to my own computer when I have to check mail (and reply to posts) or do web searches. The biggest issue I have with forums is that it is a nuisance to save important posts which I need to keep for whatever reason. If I can't save the post at the time, later (which might be several months later), I find that if I don't remember some of the exact wording, I may never be able to find it again on a forum. Once something moves down to the 4th or 5th page, it's gone as far as I'm concerned. I don't have that problem with mailing lists. The archives are usually threaded in such a way that I can locate posts that took place even years earlier without having to remember an exact phrase. Using Google (and Yahoo! and I assume MSN) to search a particular archives (even when the archives has no search feature) is very easy. Also, with mailing lists, I can glance at all the Subjects: in my mailbox and decide if I'm interested -- I'm frequently not. I don't have a problem with deletion. However, it happens often enough that something I hadn't thought about but turns out to be very important gets brought up by someone else on the mailing list. I would never have seen it otherwise. I certainly would never have seen it on a forum. My experiences on forums compel me to reply to one thing (otherwise I probably would have not said anything at all)... On Saturday 22 April 2006 09:07 pm, Sterling Christensen wrote:
You can't cancel or edit posts. Forum moderators can delete spam posts.
That's just a horrible feature. As with any kind of censorship it will do nothing but make people suspect you for deleting legitimate posts.
There've been forums like that, but they die quickly. Only forums with trustworthy admins get popular. So that's generally not a problem.
Forums can tend towards cliques. So-called "popular" forums, especially, can have this quality -- because popularity frequently equates to regulars who always show up and post. Whether you notice the censorship or not is directly related to whether you agree with the dominant viewpoints. A trustworthy admin often is one the reader agrees with -- not necessarily one that is impartial. I've seen threads locked or deleted on a number of very "popular" forums because someone aired a grievance against an important advertiser or sponsor of the forum. That isn't to say that prima donnas don't appear on mailing lists, but it's easier with a mailing list to suggest a point of view that is not the dominant one and get it heard and responded to. Good luck with whatever you decide to do. Add a forum if you feel you have to have one, but don't get rid of the mailing list. Please. deedee
On 4/24/06, deedee <deedee(a)writestop.com> wrote:
Forums can tend towards cliques. So-called "popular" forums, especially, can have this quality -- because popularity frequently equates to regulars who always show up and post.
In a way this holds for mailing lists as well, but I think the difference is that forums usually have: - Large sections containing non-technical discussion - 'Post counts', often used as a measure of status - Signup date, also used as status symbol - A visible power structure, being able to see which posters are moderators/admins. In a mailing list people tend to treat each other more as peers. - Graphical avatars and signatures - "See who else is online" features Without those things, such as if you implemented a simple web interface ontop of the mailing list, I don't think there would be as many cliques. n0dalus.
n0dalus wrote:
On 4/24/06, deedee <deedee(a)writestop.com> wrote:
Forums can tend towards cliques. So-called "popular" forums, especially, can have this quality -- because popularity frequently equates to regulars who always show up and post.
In a way this holds for mailing lists as well, but I think the difference is that forums usually have: - Large sections containing non-technical discussion - 'Post counts', often used as a measure of status - Signup date, also used as status symbol - A visible power structure, being able to see which posters are moderators/admins. In a mailing list people tend to treat each other more as peers. - Graphical avatars and signatures - "See who else is online" features
Without those things, such as if you implemented a simple web interface ontop of the mailing list, I don't think there would be as many cliques.
n0dalus. Apparently I like the clique-ish-ness (try saying that 5 times fast ;-) because I like every last one of those features..
On Monday 24 April 2006 04:50 am, Tom Spear (Dustin Booker, Dustin Navea) wrote:
n0dalus wrote:
In a way this holds for mailing lists as well, but I think the difference is that forums usually have: - Large sections containing non-technical discussion - 'Post counts', often used as a measure of status - Signup date, also used as status symbol - A visible power structure, being able to see which posters are moderators/admins. In a mailing list people tend to treat each other more as peers. - Graphical avatars and signatures - "See who else is online" features
Without those things, such as if you implemented a simple web interface on top of the mailing list, I don't think there would be as many cliques.
n0dalus.
Apparently I like the clique-ish-ness (try saying that 5 times fast ;-) because I like every last one of those features..
I think this is true for the folks who like forums. These things are, as far as I can tell, the only things people on mailing lists can't get or do (with the exception of creating large sections for non-technical or off-topic discussions). All the other "advantages" of forums discussed here are easily implemented by any mailing list subscriber who cares to implement them through their e-mail client, through webmail, and through using Google or Yahoo!'s specific-site search features. The one exception I note -- the large sections of non-technical discussion -- on every mailing list I've subscribed to, when there was a lot of interest in "off topic" discussions, a new mailing list was created for just that purpose. So having non-technical discussions is no problem with mailing lists either. deedee -- Registered Linux User #327485
The 'category' thing sounds tricky to implement on top of a mailing list (as I would like it)... Yes, categories are nice.
Sorry for sneaking into the conversation again. When I saw the Wine Wiki, I was disappointed that the app db wasn't integrated into it. It seemed like the thing to do, from a functional standpoint. It seems to me the appdb already regroups much of the categories you would end up opening in a forum. How would categories be organized inside forum? Would you open a new category for each tested app? Would you concentrate all app conversations into a single category? I hope not! But how to strike the right balance? I think a Wiki does it by its nature. It is quite organic. Content gets created on the spot, when needed, and evolves in place. If you want more categories, I suggest to expand the Wiki and merge the app db into it. Debates can stay in the mailing list. Information gets distillated in the WIki. This is yet another suggestion coming from a person that's totally independant from the project. I enjoy the easy role of offering radical suggestions.
Philippe A. wrote:
When I saw the Wine Wiki, I was disappointed that the app db wasn't integrated into it.
There does seem to be a lot of stale information in there. Maybe a Wiki would be better suited for the AppDB than the current forum. A forum there is fine too, but exposing it like it is in the AppDB is sometimes sort of like having a view into the wine-users archive anno 2002. Hmm, *scratch head*.
It seems to me the appdb already regroups much of the categories you would end up opening in a forum.
Good point.
How would categories be organized inside forum? Would you open a new category for each tested app? Would you concentrate all app conversations into a single category? I hope not! But how to strike the right balance? I think a Wiki does it by its nature. It is quite organic. Content gets created on the spot, when needed, and evolves in place.
Might be a good point, can't figure :o).
Debates can stay in the mailing list. Information gets distillated in the WIki.
Sounds very reasonable. I could imagine appropriate forum subcategories (Games --> WoW) should be referenced from the AppDB, but that the forum interface is too big to fit inside the AppDB web pages in it's whole. Wiki features for the AppDB would be _really_ really cool, me thinks.
participants (6)
-
deedee -
Molle Bestefich -
n0dalus -
Philippe A. -
Sterling Christensen -
Tom Spear (Dustin Booker, Dustin Navea)