Re: WoG vs Moon Design's forums

From: David Cake <dave_at_...>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 17:26:23 +0800

On 19/04/2012, at 1:40 AM, Stewart wrote:

> The older hands here will remember the birth of World of Glorantha, and the issues that accompanied it. Some list-members might seek to diminish these issues--variably on account of wise circumspection, toadying, emotional obliviousness and/or good-natured ignorance*--but they did exist. The situation wasn't entirely amicable.
>
> (*Have fun assigning people to those categories.)
>
> I'm not suggesting that Rick, Jeff, Greg et al. intended the death of the Glorantha Digest/List (I do not think they did), but it would be naive for anybody to think that WoG (which was touted as the only list upon which Greg would participate) would not have a negative impact upon Graham's list. It did.
>
> I remember quite a few folk being vocal critics of this state of affairs, and the idea of a new, competing list; they all moved to World of Glorantha.
        

	I make no judgement as to whether Rick, Jeff, Greg etc intended the death of the Glorantha Digest (I honestly don't remember that much about it now) - but I think if they did not, they were naive to think that effectively duplicating its function, then appointing the new one as the preferred option, would have any other result. This could indicate a somewhat ruthless way of dealing with the communities preferred means of communication, or it could indicate some lack of understanding of the dynamics of online media, or it could indicate both. 
	Regardless of which is true, I think that believing that a (particularly poorly implemented) set of forums is the functional equivalent of a (mildly augmented with web interface, etc) mailing list certainly does demonstrate some lack of understanding of how online media works . The two forms have different uses. 
	Personally, I think the forums are a mistake. This doesn't mean i'm hostile to MD or their decisions, or MD wanting to direct discussion towards their site - I think the multiple blogs, with some syndicated content across facebook etc, was a very good and effective online promotion strategy, but it should have stopped there. 

	

> (Just saying.)
>
> Moon Design has been relatively ruthless in its centralised approach to Gloranthan publishing in recent years. Rick and Jeff certainly won't thank me for saying that in somewhat harsh terms, but I mean it in a complimentary way, overall. The publication/authorship model adopted right at the beginning of the 'Hero Wars renaissance' was unsustainable. It relied on an uncontrolled enfranchisement of a community of widely differing views, productivity and abilities.

        I don't have any problem with the strategy of picking good people with a proven track record of writing great stuff and then having them write great stuff :-)

> I think this is a time for more ruthlessness.
>
> I don't like the idea of splitting of Gloranthan discussions again. The community isn't massive. The popular creative aspect of it isn't entirely dead, but is shuffling around like a decrepit leper.

	I don't like the idea of splitting the Gloranthan discussions again. 
	But as I don't think the forum strategy has much hope of long term success, then proceeding with it inevitably splits the community. 

> The situation now is also different. The WoG list and the Moon Design forums are both run by the same people. I'd prefer it if the community--by whatever means, tacit or otherwise; sugar-coat it as we must--was forced to move to a new venue. I'm sure quite a few people will complain. I'm also sure that most of them will move.

	Here is the thing. 
	Sure, if they shut down WoG and force us to move to the forums I'll try to follow what happens on the forums. 
	But I won't participate as actively on the forums, or follow what goes on as fully, because actually, forums are generally badly designed for that, and these forums are partiicularly bad for that. 
	Forums are, actually, as a point of design, ideal for situations where you want to skim the headers and NOT read most of what is there. They are brilliant for that. They work well for all sorts of situations where there is a big sprawling conversation where you are interested in a small percentage of the threads that are there (which is a good fit for a lot of product support uses, for example, where people only want to read the thread that solves their problem). I don't think that describes how most of us interact - I think most of us read at least the majority of threads on the list, if not the majority of messages. 
	Note that the people saying they liked forums on the WoG list were saying they liked forums *because they made it easier to skim*. Forums are preferred by people who like to mildly engage. I'm not sure that that is a good fit for the core of the community. 
	

> Keep World of Glorantha up as an archive; make it public but remove the ability to post.
>

        I suspect that if that happens, someone will start a new Glorantha list, and we'll be even more split than before.

> For that to happen however, the Moon Design forums would need to be in a form to handle their functioning as the `sole' carriage of Gloranthan discussion. They currently are not. If they can be brought to that level (which is as much an issue of aesthetic as function), I suggest Moon Design don't pander, or try to be equivocal and nice. Be bastards. Or bastards while pretending to be nice; you have books to sell, after all!**

        I don't think MD should act as if their interests are identical to the Gloranthan community. And nor should the community. And I don't think MD ARE bastards, I think they are a bunch of nice guys who have made a poor choice of online strategy.

	I will admit to one notable bias as regards forum software. I've had to do a fair bit of online teaching (mostly teaching about online communications, as it happens) using the forums provided as part of the Blackboard learning management system. That particular experience has left me keenly aware of the problems that can result from poorly designed forums that are inappropriate for the intended use. And also left me with a strong desire to find whoever was responsible for them and poke them in the eye. 
	Cheers

		David
           

Powered by hypermail