The “conversations” in our Google Group site remained untouched and they never “closed”. As this site is developing, I can see the benefits of exercising at least some light management of the topics and have done a few things - brought over a question from Facebook and when it generated no replies, deleted it - moved a couple topics between categories - in one case deleted a couple of interim ask/answer postings. I was about to split a thread into two, but thought I would raise the question first.
As far as I can see, Google threads didn’t have any management. Is it time to change that here?
move topics to most appropriate categories (postings will follow them)
split / merge topics where appropriate
delete posting that are questions with no replies after a couple of weeks
move some of the original discussions about trying Discourse to a less public place
Discourse has a default setting to close a topic after a year. Do we want to leave them open indefinitely?
There are now 30 users on this site, and the number of postings is growing. It seems like a good time to raise the question.
IMHO these are my answers to your proposed changes to the Nonsuch on Discourse site;
1-Yes
2-Yes
3-Perhaps 2 months
4-In this efforts infancy leave it in plain sight and get as many reply’s as possible.
5-Keep threads indefinitely for posterity unless the amount of data saved becomes too expensive, then thin according to level of perceived value.
As a user, I find it disorienting when content changes after I’ve read it.
As I’ve said before I see simplicity as a positive trait for the INA discussion group…
Decisions like these ought to be made by the folks volunteering to administer the system. Ultimately they need to do the work and answer to the users when questions arise.
Rob,
Yes I agree with you last point… Decisions like these…
My reply was made from my email and I didn’t notice the Active Admin / Moderator portion of the subject line so ‘Never Mind’
By the way when are you going to volunteer to be one of those, we (Discourse Group) as long as it lasts, could use you kind of talent.
Just sayin
Brian
I don’t want to get into system administration on Discourse. However, some of my initial motivations for interest in Discourse lie in my frustrations as a moderator for the Google Discussion Group.
I’m willing to be a moderator for this group, and frankly am itching to develop a more organized structure of categories and tags.
I agree with Rob that it’s disorienting when content changes, and think that a category and tag structure ought to be developed by a group and then changed only very rarely thereafter. I believe sometime back, Rob posted a draft taxonomy at Taxonomy - Google Docs
I think that some of these should be categories and some should be tags, but overall it represents a good starting point for thinking about these issues. Bob Gehrman also generated some thoughts about a topic structure a few years ago when we were discussing website revisions within INA a few years ago. I’d revisit those, as well.
So, responding to Jon’s questions about managing the Discourse threads, I’m raising my hand to volunteer to proceed as follows:
Organize a one-time revision of categories and tags
Apply it to the set of Discourse postings that are about Nonsuch issues
Move all current non-boat topics to a less visible place, simplifying the experience for people who just want to be discussion participants
Formally, announce a roll-out of the above
Proceed thereafter with future re-jiggering with a very light touch. (In Google, the only way you can split/merge topics is by creating a new thread. I’ve done that maybe once or twice a year in the 4-5 years I’ve been a Google moderator.)
If people are agreeable to me moderating under the above terms, here’s how I’d handle the answers to Jon’s other two questions:
I would NOT delete postings which do not receive replies. Sometimes, someone stumbles over them later and gives a delayed response. Sometimes, I take it upon myself to do research so that I’m able to provide an answer, and come back to do so when ready.
I would leave all topics open indefinitely. As a moderator, I’ve seen a lot of questions that come back at delayed intervals, e.g., Tides sail tracks that reach end of life. Closing topics would just foster thread duplication.
If people are still agreeable to me moderating after reading this screed, let me know and I’ll get started.
If not, that’s ok with me, too. The group’s entitled to moderation they agree with.
the Propane Upgrade topic went into General because we thought that initially we would use one address for new topics posted via email. I moved that to “Upgrades …”. (I started drafting a posting on Categories that would have the other post submission addresses but people may continue to use one address for simplicity.)
The topic of a stuck head door ended with a few good posts about cabin humidity. People my not find those there, so I thought of moving those postings to a new thread about Cabin Humidity…
I brought over a topic from Facebook seeking a comparison of two navigation apps. It got a bunch of views but no replies. I deleted it and advised the person who posted it to try cruisersforum. I was wondering out loud it this was a desirable practice.
To clarify, not deleting the threads but get them out of General, etc. into their own category.
To clarify - this was not about deleting old topics but closing them - cutting off new postings to a years old thread.
The workload will fall to the moderators and they can decide what to implement, but guidance would be helpful.
Bob, I liked your ideas and appreciate really your willingness bring your knowledge and experience to yet another such effort.
A decision was made to keep down the number of categories to simplify the home page. We may want to keep it that way during this early stage. We could design the structure we want to use, but delay implementation until after the transition (if we transition), or do it now to avoid a change later on.
Similarly we could decide how we want to implement a wiki and work out the procedure before the number of users goes up by a factor of 10 and there is a backlog of topics to address. The response to the straw poll shows that there are a number of people who are willing to participate in the effort.
This is titled as administrative, but appears in public, so not sure if I can post or not. Basically, I like and/or agree with every word and punctuation mark that Bob wrote.
Brian,
This is a public discussion. By Admin, I meant system administrator - a role with capabilities like a moderator.
Bob,
After re-reading - I wholly endorse your approach - it sounds more straightforward and well thought out than what I was considering. So, you have my endorsement - as we move forward, let me know how I can help.
Hi Brian,
Thanks for your vote of confidence. In the nearterm it is unlikely I’ll have time for more INA committee work. I’m just about to start a 10 week commitment as Zoom coordinator for Vassar Lifelong learning, which involves helping retired students and professors use Zoom effectively for the 8-week spring semester. We’re running about two dozen zoom courses this spring. The demographic is pretty similar to the INA crowd and the apprehension about technology is a common hurdle to overcome. I’ve assembled and coached a team of about a dozen brave souls to help everyone succeed and enjoy the semester together.
I think, INA could use some Discourse Advocates to lend a hand in a similar fashion. Trust and loyalty are best built over time, which is why I’m advocating we keep the Discourse interface simple and resist the temptation to push folks to move en masse.
After LLI is done in the spring I plan to offer to help Gary to organize some more in-person Nonsuch events on LIS. The Diesel Workshop was a hit last fall and I’d like to help with some mini-rendezvous events where we could attract some Nonsuch boats to a nice anchorage, club, or marina and enjoy a nice lunch and maybe some boat tours. In-person bonds are important, and with the upcoming plan for a Newport Nonsuch Rendezvous, a local volunteer team will be needed.
I’m here for the long haul to try and carry forward the good work of our predecessors at INA and will help in any way I can.
