EPT
On February 21 2011 14:05 dodgepong wrote:
Thanks, those are some great thoughts.
For you personally, do you tend to read through a linear post from start to finish? Or do you scan through for the best posts? Also, which format do you think would be best for the type of discussions one might find in, say, the strategy forums?
Perhaps it boils down to a fundamental difference of understanding of what a forum post is supposed to be like. One disadvantage to the linear style that I have experienced is that sometimes, I don't want to read through all 20 pages of a thread - I want to know what the meat of the discussion is and bypass the fluff. But that means I miss out on the "story" you describe. Is the story worth following in order to get to those best bits, even if a thread is really long?
Thanks, those are some great thoughts.
For you personally, do you tend to read through a linear post from start to finish? Or do you scan through for the best posts? Also, which format do you think would be best for the type of discussions one might find in, say, the strategy forums?
Perhaps it boils down to a fundamental difference of understanding of what a forum post is supposed to be like. One disadvantage to the linear style that I have experienced is that sometimes, I don't want to read through all 20 pages of a thread - I want to know what the meat of the discussion is and bypass the fluff. But that means I miss out on the "story" you describe. Is the story worth following in order to get to those best bits, even if a thread is really long?
I mostly start reading a topic from the start post by post. Whether I finish doing so is up to how the thread turns out. If a topic is one where all you're reading is 'I like to use a toothbrush to clean my teeth' and variations of such over and over again, each post a couple of lines I'll probably jump ahead a few pages and see if any discussion has evolved on techniques of brushing your teeth, or people are telling amusing stories about bathroom habits, etc.
If I can tell that a topic will end up repetitive with no poster interaction (You can usually tell) I'll either not read it at all or start from the end to see if there is anything interesting going on. If I find something then I'll go backwards to its source and start from there.
I think you have a good point about tree discussions fitting something like a strategy forum. Discussion on something like that can be quite localised, e.g.talking about specific parts of a game or the player's macro, so something that allows for posts to be organised in such a manner makes sense. Whether or not it works out I don't know.
I do believe the story of the thread is worth having to trek through the pages. As I just mentioned though if nothing is happening interesting it can make sense to skim ahead. I think it helps build a sense of community in the sense that you get to know the other posters faster than you would in a tree based system. It's possible I'm being influenced by my bias with that last point though.
The major drawback of a tree-based system with up and down votes is that people will vote based on their agreement with a post rather than what it contributes to the discussion. One thing I've learnt reading TL over the years is that people can hold diametrically opposed views on seemingly black and white issues that after reading both sides of the argument you find it difficult to say which side you fall on. In a system where people tend to vote for what they agree with rather than the quality of the post, one of these positions in such a situation usually tends to disappear. If you can find a way to solve this problem however, you've lost my major grievance with tree and vote-based comment systems.
Another drawback of the tree system is that you can only reply to one post with one post. You can of course reference other posts by mentioning them or by quoting them, but the association the reader gets when reading a post is that this post is a reply to its parent. In a single-threaded situation replies are to the thread in general, in my opinion allowing for a broader range of content to be discussed.
All this said, there are some examples I know of already of tree based systems other than reddit which actually work out very well. Based on the same principles of tree-based comments combined with up and down votes, HackerNews has some of the most interesting discussions on an albeit focused subject matter. Though maybe that it's relatively focused content makes it a good model for something such as a strategy forum like you mention.
EDIT: Spelling and grammar.
