I think we need a Content team here... anyone interested?

Anyone interested in discussing Content for this site? We've got a bit of an ethos/mission statement cooking in the cellar and I've decided to go up above to ask ye about Content and ethos...

Any thoughts ?

I'll just quote cactus flower from another discussion we are having on the issue

cactus flower wrote:

I think we are all agreed that (much though P.ie's hammer and tongs approach has great value) we want something different here, perhaps more based (whether individual posters are aware of it or not) on developing shared knowledge and raising understanding through debate (as opposed to trashing the opposition by whatever means comes to hand). That needs to involve robust debate, even more so than party political jousting, but robust in the sense of honest points well supported.


I think this fits in with Auditor's wish for the site to investigate and spread the word about technical and scientific developments and solutions.

I do feel that the posters here or on any site contribute to the ethos and development of the place more than any editorial team so I'm opening it up to you lot somewhat.

I'm interested in infrastructure, the idea of mapping knowledge in a presentable way and policy not so much politics and I'd like the site to have an ethos based around the rough principles mentioned. I'd like no-one to be afraid of asking questions and ultimately I would envisage people here filling the gaps in each other's knowledge of subjects which interest them. In place of the lunacy that goes on then in party politics I suggest a place for co-operation and participation here - if you want to burn tonys at the stake or whoever then go to p.ie and do it, it won't be tolerated here. On the other hand if there are genuine disputes and provided they are articulated in an honourable way, however robust then perhaps they will survive here but serious abuse of other posters really and truly will not be appreciated.

Any thoughts at all?

So ibis and evm (who's under the bonnet at present as it happens) do ye have any thoughts on this business of a substance for the site? As you are currently removing useful equipment (the calendar) from the territory in preparation for something else I'd also ask ye about the New Jerusalem we're going to build here and what good stuff (content) do ye have in mind and any opinions on if any?

We need fights.

The only PP to reject Lisbon is SF. So get RoC back.

My brain is still saying NO to this referendum.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

We need fights.

The only PP to reject Lisbon is SF. So get RoC back.

My brain is still saying NO to this referendum.

Apart from me and NDS, are there actually any Yes voters?

[EDIT]And Edo - I'm appalled I forgot Edo![/EDIT]

ibis wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

We need fights.

The only PP to reject Lisbon is SF. So get RoC back.

My brain is still saying NO to this referendum.

Apart from me and NDS, are there actually any Yes voters?

No. Auditor bans all the Yessies before they get to post.

Is there anyone out there who is a graphic designer who would like to design us a set of avatars? Our current selection on offer in the system is bizarre to say the least.
I was thinking possibly "themed" avatars for people's main interest - environment, global politics, chat, culture etc. Any other thoughts?

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

ibis wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

We need fights.

The only PP to reject Lisbon is SF. So get RoC back.

My brain is still saying NO to this referendum.

Apart from me and NDS, are there actually any Yes voters?

No. Auditor bans all the Yessies before they get to post.

Evotingmachine - do you think we need a "nuts and bolts" thread to look at the actual functioning and technology of the site, and its potential rather that content?
Got feed back yesterday from a non posting member, Eamo, that the "latest discussions" tab has made the site much more navigable. Or do we already have one? I know lostexpection, Audi and Ibis and yourself know a lot about this stuff: I don't have a clue how things work, but am interested as a user.

ibis wrote:

Kate P wrote:

Would the miniblog suggested above hold any attraction for you, ibis?

Not sure - originally my thought was to post blog posts as the starting points of threads...a little arrogant, but I'd soon have that knocked out of me when nobody posted on them.

Not arrogant - but optimistic...

At least under this system your confidence wouldn't be knocked out of you; rather it would be boosted if another poster decided to use your blog as the basis of a thread.

It's a win-win situation.

ibis' quote above about arrogance indicates the need for certain types of thread: we should I think give a broad idea of the kinds of threads there are and maybe try to get people into the idea of them rather than tell them - "this is a serious discussion, contribute something worthy or die" I'd say there were a lot of spectators to the ibis/Pax dialogues and also to the court marshalling of Bertie Ahern, council for def, tonys... where people watched as though from a gallery.

There are also jocular threads inviting a bit of light-heartedness but you wouldn't put these in the humour section necessarily as it more reflects people's moods...

Do ye think it would be worth throwing out some ideas on the different natures of threads or is that too Aristotelian?

There is a new forum now - Law Religion Philosophy which has the Religion forum proper in it but I yet have to create some Philosophy and Law forums so if there are any threads around which have their home in the philosophy part (the one on Death will go in a new forum Kate called The Undertaker which will house threads about the YOU KNOW WHAT. That's not serious btw)

Quote :

Do ye think it would be worth throwing out some ideas on the different natures of threads or is that too Aristotelian?

Don't scare the horses, Auditor!!

Good ideas I'm going to try to split out these posts into the Content Team thread .. haould yer horses...

It was a success - posts merged into thread...

Auditor #9 wrote:

Good ideas I'm going to try to split out these posts into the Content Team thread .. haould yer horses...

It was a success - posts merged into thread...

Could we rename the Business and Finance forum as Economy and Finance please
(or Economy and Business). The economy is the big story at the moment and underlies most politics. We are getting a few threads that Economy describes best.

Auditor #9 wrote:

Anyone interested in discussing Content for this site? We've got a bit of an ethos/mission statement cooking in the cellar and I've decided to go up above to ask ye about Content and ethos...

Any thoughts ?

I'd be interested. Again, while ibis and Edo and others would be interested in the Lisbon Treaty and EU affairs; yourself and EvotingMachine0197 would be more interested in technolgy, I'd keep the economic, historical and the political theory end of affairs running.

What about the site in general AT? Say, something generic and applicable to economy and technology - all forums? Something about the very Soul of MN?



contributors will be credited on the Charter of course

Auditor #9 wrote:

What about the site in general AT? Say, something generic and applicable to both economy and technology? Something about the very Soul of MN?

Again, I'd be willing to grapple with that. I could advise on formatting. I like formatting.

I could also manage content discussing the economic impact of technologies, both old and new on capital flows, scarcity power, comparative advantages and concentration of resources and so on. That sounds fascinating.

Auditor #9 wrote:

What about the site in general AT? Say, something generic and applicable to economy and technology - all forums? Something about the very Soul of MN?



contributors will be credited on the Charter of course

I was giving the development of this site further though over the past few days and I have a suggestion. How about we replicate the Leviathan forum over here in Machine Nation?

The Edit function is disabled on posts in this forum and deletion of posts is not a possibility. This reminds posters to weigh their words carefully and express themselves in a more lucid and clear manner.

This forum can embody the ideal expressed by EvotingMachine0197 for a forum dedicated to discussions of a truly deep and meaningful nature.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

What about the site in general AT? Say, something generic and applicable to economy and technology - all forums? Something about the very Soul of MN?



contributors will be credited on the Charter of course

I was giving the development of this site further though over the past few days and I have a suggestion. How about we replicate the Leviathan forum over here in Machine Nation?

The Edit function is disabled on posts in this forum and deletion of posts is not a possibility. This reminds posters to weigh their words carefully and express themselves in a more lucid and clear manner.

This forum can embody the ideal expressed by EvotingMachine0197 for a forum dedicated to discussions of a truly deep and meaningful nature.

Very interesting Ard Taoiseach: I think there is a consensus that we need some high quality special occasion debates.

cactus flower wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

What about the site in general AT? Say, something generic and applicable to economy and technology - all forums? Something about the very Soul of MN?



contributors will be credited on the Charter of course

I was giving the development of this site further though over the past few days and I have a suggestion. How about we replicate the Leviathan forum over here in Machine Nation?

The Edit function is disabled on posts in this forum and deletion of posts is not a possibility. This reminds posters to weigh their words carefully and express themselves in a more lucid and clear manner.

This forum can embody the ideal expressed by EvotingMachine0197 for a forum dedicated to discussions of a truly deep and meaningful nature.

Very interesting Ard Taoiseach: I think there is a consensus that we need some high quality special occasion debates.

I was thinking along the same lines as yourself, cactus flower. If a major theme came up: Ireland's neutrality, the future of the €urozone, the unification of Ireland, the role of Ireland in the EU for examples, we could indeed have a specialist forum to discuss these at a level which is well-written, eloquent and accompanied by a wealth of insight.

Here here ArdT - I like your ideas. A complete one-sided argument !! And on the other side the other side of the argument !!

Another idea: can we get a system where the number of times a user is reported is included in their profile details? Serial abusers of these fora can be explicitly marked out as being consistently reported on. New users can then know immediately which users to be comfortable with and be wary of.

Additionaly, those with low/no reports on their comments could be given the reward of being able to start threads on these special fora.

Auditor #9 wrote:

Here here ArdT - I like your ideas. A complete one-sided argument !! And on the other side the other side of the argument !!

Are you referring to how discussion would un-fold on my putative special discussions forum idea?

Or to the intrinsic value of my idea?

Thanks very much for your appreciation of my comments.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Another idea: can we get a system where the number of times a user is reported is included in their profile details? Serial abusers of these fora can be explicitly marked out as being consistently reported on. New users can then know immediately which users to be comfortable with and be wary of.

Additionaly, those with low/no reports on their comments could be given the reward of being able to start threads on these special fora.

I suggest pro-active management in the unlikely event of forum abuse - etiquette boot camp - only allowed to post when their mentor is there to give constant nudges, guidance or, if necessary, the boot.

cactus flower wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Another idea: can we get a system where the number of times a user is reported is included in their profile details? Serial abusers of these fora can be explicitly marked out as being consistently reported on. New users can then know immediately which users to be comfortable with and be wary of.

Additionaly, those with low/no reports on their comments could be given the reward of being able to start threads on these special fora.

I suggest pro-active management in the unlikely event of forum abuse - etiquette boot camp - only allowed to post when their mentor is there to give constant nudges, guidance or, if necessary, the boot.

Mmm. That sounds good. We could also introduce a rule where only those posters with above 100 posts or Mod privileges are allowed to start threads.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Another idea: can we get a system where the number of times a user is reported is included in their profile details? Serial abusers of these fora can be explicitly marked out as being consistently reported on. New users can then know immediately which users to be comfortable with and be wary of.

Additionaly, those with low/no reports on their comments could be given the reward of being able to start threads on these special fora.

I suggest pro-active management in the unlikely event of forum abuse - etiquette boot camp - only allowed to post when their mentor is there to give constant nudges, guidance or, if necessary, the boot.

Mmm. That sounds good. We could also introduce a rule where only those posters with above 100 posts or Mod privileges are allowed to start threads.

Rún iontach Ard-T