3 ms·

There's many problems with forums though. Different UI/UX interface. Different requirements in order to be able to start using. You have to register a new accou

There's many problems with forums though. Different UI/UX interface. Different requirements in order to be able to start using. You have to register a new account. A lot of friction before you are able to join and participate in a new community. Many forums will also require you to have certain amount of useful posts to avoid spam etc. With Reddit, or Reddit alternatives you don't have to worry about all that.

mostlysimilar 3y ago
Perhaps some friction is a good thing. Registering an account isn't exactly a huge burden, especially in the era where your browser will pre-fill and store the credentials for you forever. Maybe if it wasn't so easy to pop in and karma farm / spam / meme we would have some more thoughtful discourse online again.
shagie 3y ago
> A lot of friction before you are able to join and participate in a new community. Arguably, that is one of the things that keeps the quality of content higher. Likewise, it is too easy to post on Reddit allowing for the easy low content/quality material to make its way there more frequently. Quoting from A Group is its Own Worst Enemy - https://gwern.net/doc/technology/2005-shirky-agroupisitsownworstenemy.pdf https://gwern.net/doc/technology/2005-shirky-agroupisitsownw... ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35855988 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35855988 ) - from four things to design for: > Three, you need some barriers to participation, however small. This is one of the things that killed Usenet, because there was almost no barrier to posting, leading to both generic system failures like spam, and also specific failures, like constant misogynist attacks in any group related to feminism, or racist attacks in any group related to African- Americans. You have to have some cost to either join or participate, if not at the lowest level, then at higher levels. There needs to be some kind of segmentation of capabilities. > Now, the segmentation can be total—you’re in or you’re out, as with the music group I just listed. Or it can be partial—anyone can read Slashdot, anonymous cowards can post, non-anonymous cowards can post with a higher rating. But to moderate, you really have to have been around for a while. It has to be hard to do at least some things on the system for some users, or the core group will not have the tools that they need to defend themselves. > Now, this pulls against the cardinal programming virtue of ease of use, but ease of use is the wrong goal for social software. Ease of use is the wrong way to look at the situation, because you’ve got the Necker cube flipped in the wrong direction, toward the individual, when in fact, the user of a piece of social software is the group.

mostlysimilar 3y ago

Perhaps some friction is a good thing. Registering an account isn't exactly a huge burden, especially in the era where your browser will pre-fill and store the credentials for you forever. Maybe if it wasn't so easy to pop in and karma farm / spam / meme we would have some more thoughtful discourse online again.

shagie 3y ago

> A lot of friction before you are able to join and participate in a new community. Arguably, that is one of the things that keeps the quality of content higher. Likewise, it is too easy to post on Reddit allowing for the easy low content/quality material to make its way there more frequently. Quoting from A Group is its Own Worst Enemy - https://gwern.net/doc/technology/2005-shirky-agroupisitsownworstenemy.pdf https://gwern.net/doc/technology/2005-shirky-agroupisitsownw... ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35855988 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35855988 ) - from four things to design for: > Three, you need some barriers to participation, however small. This is one of the things that killed Usenet, because there was almost no barrier to posting, leading to both generic system failures like spam, and also specific failures, like constant misogynist attacks in any group related to feminism, or racist attacks in any group related to African- Americans. You have to have some cost to either join or participate, if not at the lowest level, then at higher levels. There needs to be some kind of segmentation of capabilities. > Now, the segmentation can be total—you’re in or you’re out, as with the music group I just listed. Or it can be partial—anyone can read Slashdot, anonymous cowards can post, non-anonymous cowards can post with a higher rating. But to moderate, you really have to have been around for a while. It has to be hard to do at least some things on the system for some users, or the core group will not have the tools that they need to defend themselves. > Now, this pulls against the cardinal programming virtue of ease of use, but ease of use is the wrong goal for social software. Ease of use is the wrong way to look at the situation, because you’ve got the Necker cube flipped in the wrong direction, toward the individual, when in fact, the user of a piece of social software is the group.