Discussion page that structures discussions more than just a tree format (here is a mockup I designed while working for Arbital, that I am still excited to implement)
I’m personally very enthusiastic about trees, especially with good support for collapsing and navigating, and would advocate trees++ rather than an alternative.
I don’t understand what’s going on fully from the mock-up. I get the idea that there are “questions” and then there are “considerations”. It looks like there are other things listed directly below the questions which are not either questions or considerations?
I like the idea of pulling claims out of articles and organizing discussions around those claims. Not exclusively, perhaps—some discussions aren’t going to be best organized in that way. For example, some things are more like noun phrases, pointing out an important-feeling object/cluster without an explicit claim that’s easy to articulate.
The basic idea of the mockup is that you have a discussion that happens on three layers:
Top-level considerations, polls and comments
Discussion of these considerations
Summaries of the current state of the considerations and discussion
The considerations, polls and comments can be noun phrases or feelings, and if they get highly upvoted, a summary is strongly encouraged to include the comments and the comment thread below it.
The summaries will be prominently displayed at the top, to allow new users to get a sense of the current state of the discussion, and participate productively. It also allows users who just want a quick answer to the question of the thread to quickly get what they want.
New Content Types:
Discussion page that structures discussions more than just a tree format (here is a mockup I designed while working for Arbital, that I am still excited to implement)
I’m personally very enthusiastic about trees, especially with good support for collapsing and navigating, and would advocate trees++ rather than an alternative.
If it’s a question of how everything is displayed, I think I agree that trees are better than floaty boxes.
I don’t understand what’s going on fully from the mock-up. I get the idea that there are “questions” and then there are “considerations”. It looks like there are other things listed directly below the questions which are not either questions or considerations?
I like the idea of pulling claims out of articles and organizing discussions around those claims. Not exclusively, perhaps—some discussions aren’t going to be best organized in that way. For example, some things are more like noun phrases, pointing out an important-feeling object/cluster without an explicit claim that’s easy to articulate.
The basic idea of the mockup is that you have a discussion that happens on three layers:
Top-level considerations, polls and comments
Discussion of these considerations
Summaries of the current state of the considerations and discussion
The considerations, polls and comments can be noun phrases or feelings, and if they get highly upvoted, a summary is strongly encouraged to include the comments and the comment thread below it.
The summaries will be prominently displayed at the top, to allow new users to get a sense of the current state of the discussion, and participate productively. It also allows users who just want a quick answer to the question of the thread to quickly get what they want.