What makes a good forum discussion

[that list Alex posted]

I like these!
"Don't try to get anyone to shut up, don't run away from challenges, don't attack straw men, keep to the substance at hand, don't put words in your opponent's mouth or out of your own, don't lie, don't give up, do make sense, have dignity, and be precise and fair."
Then of course, these are rather high standards to set. Not everyone is comfortable going in without emotion or watching out what they are saying every time, or read with care what their opponent says. If everyone followed all of these guidelines, even the most heated and controversial topics would be settled and done with some two pages down the thread or so. There are some questions one might ask. Why restrict oneself like that? Is it fair to restrict others, too, or to even expect that they would restrict themselves in these ways? Would we want every issue to be resolved and closed in the shortest possible time? Why, or why not? Can there be a compromise between order of this sort and freedom of the sort we currently enjoy? Should there be a compromise? Why, or why not? And so on...

Edan wrote: ...or just arguing over what's appropriate/acceptable/on topic...

This, to me, is precisely what makes a bad forum discussion. When people start talking about things, the discussion is going to drift. I can't count the number of times I've been talking to somebody in person and an hour later we look at each other and go, "How did this conversation start?" Trying to stop that natural drift will often stop the conversation.

I think saying, "That's not on topic" is only helpful if the original topic is still being discussed by other people. In that case, the best thing to do is make another thread. Not try to stop the conversation. Just immediately make another thread that's basically "We were talking about ______ (here's a link). Let's keep talking here." But if the original topic stopped being talked about long ago, why try to stamp out the current discussion?

Lykeios wrote: New things should be added to the conversation rather than simple reiterations of points made previously.

That is what happens when the conversation has naturally drifted and then somebody swoops in to "get it back on topic." It usually resets the conversation back to all the things that have already been said about it.

A good sense of humour utilised by all...

Not necessarily that everyone should be a comedian...a few well-placed snippets of actual humour are always welcome, but if every post was more concerned with trying to be funny than trying to actually engage in discussion, we wouldn't learn very much (not to mention that things would stop being funny any more)...

But, when everyone is engaging in discussion from a place of gentle good-humour, it tends to help the discussion stay on-topic, impersonal, and a more enjoyable place for everyone to hang out - all of which hopefully contributes to it being generally much more productive.

Before we do any discussion, I think the first thing we need to do is decide what we are here for in a "big" sense. It's not going to be the same for everyone. Keeping that in mind allows for us to see things through that lens.

Some people are here for knowledge as a priority, some people are here for social connection as a priority, some people are here as a play of power and authority. Two things are important: to remember why you are here and to remember that other people are here for other things. Contribute where you would like, don't contribute where you don't want to.

Rosalyn J wrote: Before we do any discussion, I think the first thing we need to do is decide what we are here for in a "big" sense. It's not going to be the same for everyone. Keeping that in mind allows for us to see things through that lens.

Some people are here for knowledge as a priority, some people are here for social connection as a priority, some people are here as a play of power and authority. Two things are important: to remember why you are here and to remember that other people are here for other things. Contribute where you would like, don't contribute where you don't want to.

A very good point. Especially helpful for me as I'm not sure why I'm really here...it should help to examine that. I mean...I know I'm here to learn and to connect socially but that seems like an inadequate reason. I feel like there's a bigger underlying reason to it but can't define it.

Trying to understand what the thread creator wants to discuss, and making a constructive contribution to it.

Rosalyn J wrote: Before we do any discussion, I think the first thing we need to do is decide what we are here for in a "big" sense. It's not going to be the same for everyone. Keeping that in mind allows for us to see things through that lens.

Some people are here for knowledge as a priority, some people are here for social connection as a priority, some people are here as a play of power and authority. Two things are important: to remember why you are here and to remember that other people are here for other things. Contribute where you would like, don't contribute where you don't want to.

Personal Thanks to both Edan and Rosalyn, much appreciated!

First off, a little respect and common courtesy would be nice while keeping discussions on topic AND civil, I apologize for detailing when it happens, I won't deney I do it from time to time... :dry:

I am here very much to learn, i'd prefer to spend much more time conversing in the forums then I have previously, what free time I get Is usually spent studying/reading or devoting the energy on wrapping this apprenticeship up, put put... :whistle:

humor is good

not taking - or making - things too personal is good

say something ive never heard or thought of before (and that makes sense) and i might just hit THANK YOU even if i totally disagree with your position

same if your post just makes me smile, THANK YOU!

i dont freak out about conversations evolving naturally

i think OP should be understood as primary moderator so to speak, not in the sense of being bossy or uptight but in the zense that the one who started the topic has got kind of an ownership to it and if they are bothered by the direction it takes then courtesy imo would be to defer to their preference

of course, if a discussion goes on long enough it has a life of its own and that might be worth respecting too; the whole point is to be engaged and if people are really engaged then imo thats good, even if its outside the OPs original expectation

ive been snotty and vain and smug and preachy and over sensitive of my own feelings while not really being sensitive at all of other peoples and yet all of these things do tend to irritate me a bit when i see them

especially i get irritated when people deliberately jibe each other or when people take things more personally than they should and then kind of contaminate the whole topic with their hard feelings

my advice about how to handle it when things get off topic is simple; start talking about the topic! take initiative to get the conversation back on track, not by ordering anyone else to do what you want, but simply by doing yourself what you think ought to be done!

and long posts are pretty annoying; i dont go to an online discussion forum to have to READ

Rosalyn J wrote: Some people are here for knowledge as a priority, some people are here for social connection as a priority, some people are here as a play of power and authority.

i dont know if you were thinking when you wrote this of the same things that i thought of when i read it, but i can tell you that i personally am not playing along with anyones "power and authority"

if someone is here to be in charge or to fill their own desire to be seen as an authority figure then more power to them, i wont run around badgering them about it, but i dont think its a worthy aspiration for a jedi and im not going to defer to their wishes in the way i carry my own conversations

its one thing to offer a basic reminder of how we, as a community, aspire to interact with each other if we see that discussions are getting heated and tempers are being stirred - i respect that quite a bit when its done judiciously - but its another thing altogether for someone to assume theyve the right to decide how or when anyone else is allowed to speak or what someone else is allowed to say, beyond the rules of the forum

Two things are important: to remember why you are here and to remember that other people are here for other things. Contribute where you would like, don't contribute where you don't want to.

this was very well said, thank you!

sometimes people just want to chat without everything they say being dissected and analyzed and picked apart

i understand that and i do agree its fair

but also this is a public space and that means it isnt actually safe

would you post your credit card number here? if you were leaving town for a month would you feel comfortable sharing your address and how to locate the fake rock where you hide the spare key?

no, because its the internet

its healthy to have feedback when we believe things that are out of touch with reality

doesnt mean we arent allowed to believe them, and it doesnt mean that its right to badger someone about their beliefs

but i dont know how to phrase a "rule" or guideline for deciding when to challenge someone and when not to, its kind of a case by case determination

you dont have to challenge every damn thing; it doesnt actually kill you that other people believe in the boogey man, and if your real motive is simply that you want to chop someones legs out then it might do you good to put the ax down for a little while

infact, whats left of you without the ax? anything at all?

on the other hand, we should all clear as many of the unreasonable beliefs out of our mental inventories as possible

we tend to have a cleaner and more useful understanding of the world without them, and as uncomfortable as the experience is, it is truly a gift to realize that we were wrong about something or not properly critical about something: from that point on, we no longer have to be quite so wrong about that particular thing

already being right is nice, but we ought not to be so attached to it that it obstructs us from becoming more right (or less wrong) from here out