General Question

CallorFold's avatar

Would you join my moderated discussion site once it is set up?

Asked by CallorFold (38points) November 14th, 2015

Following on from my last question, I am now considering launching my own site for moderated political discussion where personal attacks are against the rules. I would be the moderator. Would you be interested in joining the site? If you have conditions, what are they? If there are pitfalls that have prevented previous projects of this nature succeeding, what are they and do you have any ideas on how I can avoid them?

My current plan is for users to provide an email address which will used for password resets. Users will be able to write one diary per day. Users will be able to comment on the diaries and recommend diaries. There will be a recommended list. There will be the ability to get a list of diaries and to go to another page to see the diaries that came before. This can repeat back to the first diary.

Users will be able to reply to comments and there will be a page they can visit which has links to any comment that has a new reply. Users will be able to visit a comment and its replies, without having to visit the parent diary.

Users will be free to go on tangents in diary comments. Users will be free to provide as much or as little evidence as they wish.

The site will be primarily about the US political scene. Users will be free to advocate for particular candidates and parties.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

10 Answers

janbb's avatar

I’m sorry but I kind of get enough moderated political discussion on this site as I want or need.

ibstubro's avatar

Sorry, probably not.
I’m over-saturated (and highly disgusted) with American politics as it is.

Unsourced tangents advocating a particular candidate?
That’s certain to make America great again.

filmfann's avatar

Good luck! My advice is to avoid setting up an Amish chat room. Those never get popular.

Seek's avatar

I wouldn’t join a message board dedicated to a particular topic.

Those invariably tend toward becoming echo chambers. People join solely for the purpose of arguing, with no intention of asking questions or assimilating new information.


stanleybmanly's avatar

Well it might be an effective method of deflecting me from mounting the pulpit for interminable grandstanding here.

Cruiser's avatar

Political arguments discussions are exhausting enough without having to deal with moderation and additional rules of engagement at the get-go. Your vision sounds way too complicated and I would take a pass.

Zaku's avatar

Would you be interested in joining the site?
I’d have to see it, and see if I feel like it then. However:

If you have conditions, what are they?
I only write in when I think I have something to contribute, and I think the crowd has a chance of hearing what I have to say. I also tend to reply from outside the box questions are worded in, and wouldn’t reply if I thought that wasn’t welcome. I especially don’t like writing considered posts and having them get deleted at some point. So if posts can be moderated out of a topic, I’d at least want them to still be visible somewhere.

If there are pitfalls that have prevented previous projects of this nature succeeding, what are they and do you have any ideas on how I can avoid them?
I think it’s rare to get many people who will actually show up and have interesting political discussions that don’t become polarized and exclude certain viewpoints and don’t get dominated by a group of people who get invested in the site. Political discussions particularly in a modern US context tend to become polarized very quickly, and it takes people who can step back to have anything but polarized arguments, or polarized agreement because the other side doesn’t even show up. At least with polarized agreement, there is some possibility of saying something other than “we’re right”, eventually.

Buttonstc's avatar

The way you describe the overall set up sounds pretty torturous and difficult to follow.

It may all be clear in your mind but it sounds like people would be hopping all over the place to follow through on discussion threads.

I’m more used to a typical linear forum board where a Q or topic is stated and all further comments are filed right underneath.

I didn’t even like the way that AB had different remarks going off on different tangents all their own and your system sounds even more convoluted and difficult to follow.

I’m not trying to be hyper-critical here but you wanted honest feedback.

Simpler is better and the more convoluted a forum discussion is the more I tend to avoid it.

Plus, I’m not much for politics to begin with, so I’d probably take a pass.

filmfann's avatar

@johnpowell. I know! It’s like they are Luddites or something!

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther