conversational velocity
Posted by:
kurt
()
Date: June 06, 2001 08:36PM
<HTML>Well, I agree with you Jeff.
I bear no ill will to Tony\'s birthday (Happy b\'day Tony!)
But, the problem is that when there is a lot of extraneous posting (and I\'ve done a few in my day, I\'ll admit) is that the speed at which a conversational thread falls off the front page increases - what I call conversational velocity.
Once a thread goes off the front page the number of people who see it and comment goes way down. That\'s just human nature. So if a thread dissappears from the first page in less than one or two days, it is hard to a get a good thread of comments, countercomments, reactions, counterarguments, etc going before the thread goes \'dead\'. After one or two rounds of comments, zing! the thread is not in front, and it goes dead.
In that sense any extraneous comments or postings lower the quality of all the other conversations on the board. Right now, our conversational velocity is about two days - two days till a thread falls off the front, and that is just about the upper end of what is acceptable - three or four days would be better in my opinion. In other words, I think we already have too much posting for an optimum board.
Personal threads are bad not only because they are extraneous, but because they tend to produce a lot of traffic and comments - everyone wants to say \'how was your trip\', or \'hope you\'re feeling better soon\', etc. - very bad for conversational velocity.
Of course, the chatty side of things gives a human face to us and helps this place feel more like a circle of friends, which has a lot of value too. It is important not to be too stiff about these things, but right now I am concerned that posts are dissappearing from sight too fast, and our discussion quality is hurting.
I mean no ill will to anyone, but does anyone else share this impression of excessive \'conversational velocity\' on the board?
</HTML>
I bear no ill will to Tony\'s birthday (Happy b\'day Tony!)
But, the problem is that when there is a lot of extraneous posting (and I\'ve done a few in my day, I\'ll admit) is that the speed at which a conversational thread falls off the front page increases - what I call conversational velocity.
Once a thread goes off the front page the number of people who see it and comment goes way down. That\'s just human nature. So if a thread dissappears from the first page in less than one or two days, it is hard to a get a good thread of comments, countercomments, reactions, counterarguments, etc going before the thread goes \'dead\'. After one or two rounds of comments, zing! the thread is not in front, and it goes dead.
In that sense any extraneous comments or postings lower the quality of all the other conversations on the board. Right now, our conversational velocity is about two days - two days till a thread falls off the front, and that is just about the upper end of what is acceptable - three or four days would be better in my opinion. In other words, I think we already have too much posting for an optimum board.
Personal threads are bad not only because they are extraneous, but because they tend to produce a lot of traffic and comments - everyone wants to say \'how was your trip\', or \'hope you\'re feeling better soon\', etc. - very bad for conversational velocity.
Of course, the chatty side of things gives a human face to us and helps this place feel more like a circle of friends, which has a lot of value too. It is important not to be too stiff about these things, but right now I am concerned that posts are dissappearing from sight too fast, and our discussion quality is hurting.
I mean no ill will to anyone, but does anyone else share this impression of excessive \'conversational velocity\' on the board?
</HTML>
| Subject | Written By | Posted |
|---|---|---|
birthday
|
tony | 06/06/2001 02:47PM |
|
RE: birthday
|
John Griffiths | 06/06/2001 03:40PM |
|
RE: birthday
|
John R. | 06/06/2001 03:40PM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Rainer Bruns | 06/06/2001 04:12PM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Scott | 06/06/2001 04:47PM |
|
RE: birthday
|
James | 06/06/2001 05:23PM |
|
No offense, Tony...but?
|
Jeff | 06/06/2001 05:32PM |
|
RE: No offense, Tony...but?
|
Rainer Bruns | 06/06/2001 05:45PM |
|
RE: No offense, Tony...but?
|
Bill | 06/07/2001 06:27AM |
|
RE: No offense, Tony...but?
|
John Griffiths | 06/06/2001 07:13PM |
|
RE: No offense, Tony...but?
|
steve | 06/06/2001 10:01PM |
|
RE: No offense, Tony...but?
|
John Griffiths | 06/07/2001 04:00PM |
|
RE: No offense, Tony...but?
|
Takeo | 06/07/2001 04:30AM |
|
Here comes the name-calling!
|
Jeff | 06/07/2001 05:01AM |
|
conversational velocity
|
kurt | 06/06/2001 08:36PM |
|
RE: conversational velocity
|
Rainer Bruns | 06/06/2001 11:20PM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Roy Prince | 06/07/2001 01:46AM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Barry Williams | 06/07/2001 12:19PM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Takeo | 06/07/2001 04:30AM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Torlef | 06/07/2001 06:08AM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Will King | 06/07/2001 08:46AM |
|
RE: birthday
|
Carl | 06/07/2001 09:50AM |
|
RE: birthday
|
William | 06/07/2001 11:59AM |
|
Fair enough...
|
Jeff | 06/07/2001 01:02PM |