Future of Felicifia

Vote for forum (0.00 / 0)

Hi Seth,

I'll just repeat publicly what I said via email. I strongly favour a forum for various reasons:

1) The single topic format seems to favour a forum over a blog system. If people want blogs, there are dozens of other places to run them, which I suspect are more versatile.

2) I find forums are more easily navigable. Subforums let you categorise topics by subject rather than by poster, which is usually much more useful both for general browsing and digging out particular discussions.

3) A forum helps develop a community, and communities spread ideas far better than individual writers.

4) Relatedly, I'd bet that the average netizen is more familiar with forum software than blogging, if only because forum software is much easier to use. Not only do most modern forums have built-in formatting, but it's converging with MS Word's icons, so everyone knows how to use it.

5) I suspect several existing forums (like the atheist forums) have several members who'd be interested in this place if it were more similar to what they were used to. I've noticed myself coming here a few times planning to comment on something only to surf away because it felt like too much hassle.

I would also prefer to archive than delete, but I don't know how much hassle is involved. I assume converting the posts here into a format new forum software would be able to assimilate is impossible?

Let me know if I can help.

J

---

by: Jinksy @ Sat Aug 16, 2008 at 14:18:36 PM CDT

Preserving content, $15 (0.00 / 0)

I don't have particular suggestions on what format would be best (a forum seems okay). $15 does add up over time -- a $15 perpetuity compounded monthly at an annual rate of, say, 12% is $1500. But I'm not sure what the opportunity cost of your time is, nor how long a change would take.

I do think it's worth preserving the existing content in some form. It would be nice if this included the original links, since there may be some web pages currently linking to posts here, but I don't know if that's feasible.

---

by: Alan Dawrst @ Sat Aug 16, 2008 at 15:29:01 PM CDT

forums and wikis are good good things (0.00 / 0)

Firstly, I'm new here so I think I shouldn't offer an opinion on archiving content.

Secondly, gee I think it would be a shame to completely close the door on the possibility of a dynamic online utilitarianism community.  Replacing felicifia with unchangeable content would be quite a shame. I mean felicifia may be quiet but if it is lost then how long do you think it will be until another utilitarianism community is created?

Thirdly, I think that the loudness and vibrance of a website is going to depend to some extent on the content. I mean it really helps to have regular posts on interpretation of utilitarian writings or discussion of news & current affairs or discussion of law or real-life meetups or a project collating opinions on the application of utilitarianism or something like that. I guess changing the site to a forum or a wiki would go some way to enticing posters so it could be a positive step.

---

by: theduffman @ Sat Aug 16, 2008 at 23:25:11 PM CDT

Future of Felicifia (0.00 / 0)

Utilitarians - even academic utilitarians - must learn to be successful marketers. Successful marketing entails not publicly lamenting that one's product isn't very successful !

Thus I wonder if this discussion might be better framed as a plea for ideas on ways to build on the success of Felicifia.  Both the quality and even the volume of the postings is higher than we might have anticipated when Felicifia launched. [I wrongly assumed that Felicifia could succeed only if it were a glorified crib sheet to help students writing their essays. I still think a supplementary Utilitarian FAQ and Resources section for students is a good idea - though this will take a fair bit of time and work]

I'm strongly in favour of keeping the forum - even if it (currently) doesn't get the traffic it deserves. [Why not more? On the one hand, reading and writing about suffering can be depressing - a powerful disincentive -  whereas "Happiness is a very pretty thing to feel, but very dry to talk about" (Bentham).

Perhaps it's worth noting too that fluctuations in traffic depend as much on the vagaries of the search engines as the excellence of content...

---

by: davidpearce @ Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 04:04:56 AM CDT

Terminology (0.00 / 0)

It sounds as though there's might be some inconsistency in the terms we're using. By forum, I'm thinking of something like this, specifically in opposition to Felicifia's current unlinked-blog format.

While I prefer moving to a forum (while keeping the current content as intact, accessible and integrated as possible), worst of all worlds would be reverting to purely static content.

David, are you arguing against moving to sometime like TR, or basically saying the same as me?

On a utilitarianism FAQ and resources, it's an ok idea as far as it goes, but it feels a bit Web 2.0. I think a utilitarianism Wiki would be more effective (or maybe a consequentialism Wiki for broader appeal). I've always found the most useful element of Wikis is their external links, so I think they're the natural evolution of FAQ sections... maybe harder to set up, but more self-sustaining.

---

by: Jinksy @ Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 12:23:38 PM CDT

Some comments (0.00 / 0)

So first, I'm glad to hear little interest in a static website or no website.  I don't like these ideas either, but I included them for the sake of completeness.

The main question I have now is, if we switch to a forum, what discussions would we be having that we aren't having now?  In other words, what do you or others want to talk about?

---------

Re Jinksy

1) The single topic format seems to favour a forum over a blog system. If people want blogs, there are dozens of other places to run them, which I suspect are more versatile.
- I think the issue is more static vs dynamic topics than single vs multiple topics but as I noted in the post I still think a forum might be more appropriate for Felicifia's content.

2) I find forums are more easily navigable. Subforums let you categorise topics by subject rather than by poster, which is usually much more useful both for general browsing and digging out particular discussions.
- Felicifia has its tag list but it doesn't have a tag/subtag sort of tree structure.

3) A forum helps develop a community, and communities spread ideas far better than individual writers.
- I disagree.  The most influential dynamic websites are mostly blogs, not forums.  (c.f. netroots.)  I agree that single-author blogs are less about community, but this is not a single-author blog.  Most of the idea spreading comes from lurkers, i.e. people who read but don't write.  The blog format is much more effective for this.

4) Relatedly, I'd bet that the average netizen is more familiar with forum software than blogging, if only because forum software is much easier to use. Not only do most modern forums have built-in formatting, but it's converging with MS Word's icons, so everyone knows how to use it.
- SoapBlox has a WYSIWYG editor we can try playing around with.

5) I suspect several existing forums (like the atheist forums) have several members who'd be interested in this place if it were more similar to what they were used to. I've noticed myself coming here a few times planning to comment on something only to surf away because it felt like too much hassle.
- This is an important concern, and one I've heard before.  I've never found this site to be a hassle because my computer automatically logs me in, but that hasn't been the case for everyone.  However, I think previously the comparison was to other blog platforms like WordPress where you don't have to register and log into an account to post.  With forums (at least the forums I recall) you did need to go through an account, so that issue would not be changed.

---------

Re Alan, regarding the $: If this site really isn't going to get used then I think eventually we should save the money, but as long as it hasn't been completely abandoned then I think the money isn't the issue.

---------

Re theduffman: I doubt a wiki would succeed because there's little point in duplicating Wikipedia.  We might as well invest time improving the relevant pages there.  If we had a very large community such as that of OpenWetWare then maybe it would work, but for our present small numbers I don't think it would.

I think that the loudness and vibrance of a website is going to depend to some extent on the content.
- I agree.  I think we see this reflected in the traffic stats shown in the post.  And we got another traffic spike on Aug 16 when this post went up.

There were a number of lively discussions on Felicifia a year or so ago when we were more active.  That could happen again without a platform switch, although that doesn't mean we shouldn't switch.

---------

Re David

Utilitarians - even academic utilitarians - must learn to be successful marketers. Successful marketing entails not publicly lamenting that one's product isn't very successful !
- I'm not too worried about this.  If this was post/discussion was that public of a lament, there wouldn't be anything to lament.  Also it seems clear that the site's success is more about the level of engagement of its participants not the appeal of the underlying ideology.

---

by: Seth Baum @ Mon Aug 18, 2008 at 20:12:00 PM CDT

what I most want to talk about (0.00 / 0)

What I would like is to ask each other questions we are asking ourselves. I've drawn from my diary some of these topics:
when should one break confidentiality? When should one break confidentiality law? When should one ask permission to watch their surgery? To what extent should we redistribute wealth? How can we reply to Daniel Dennett charging utilitarianism with 'greedy reductionism'? Is it advantageous to use the terms good, evil, more good, more evil etc? Is it ethical to eat animals? Is it ethical to eat animals for a while as I learn about vegetarian foods?

How can we structure arguments in favour for atheism and in favour for utilitarianism? How can we argue that truth exists and that logic and reason are valid ways of thinking compared with say faith? Is there any merit in the idea of punishment?

I guess you guys have already discussed lots of these things on felicifia.

re: the wiki idea, I think you're right that if it were an encyclopaedia it wouldn't necessarily offer anything that wikipedia does not. The main way round this that I can see would be to focus on interpretation and application of utilitarianism and to include original thought. I may be the only one, but I'd find it quite interesting to see two opposite arguments on the topic, say, of vegetarianism put together by lots of intelligent utilitarians. Against the idea of wiki-utilitarianism-opinion, on one level it seems a waste to create a site just for putting opinionated forum-posters on a pedestal where they can broadcast their beliefs in a more organised, permanent way.  

---

by: theduffman @ Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 02:40:58 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

re what I most want to talk about (0.00 / 0)

I guess you guys have already discussed lots of these things on felicifia.
- Is it helpful having the old discussions up there for viewing?  Is it more important to have live discussions on these matters?  Also, these are some more academic questions.  I'm curious your thoughts on having a site for both academics & non-academics at the same time.

---

by: Seth Baum @ Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 20:34:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

old discussions/academicness (0.00 / 0)

hmm... displaying old discussions is not something widely done, is it? People advise against "revival" of old threads and so on. Would it be useful to permanently display opinions on big timeless issues? Good question, may be.

Yeah I guess the issues I spend lots of time on are academic questions. Having said that, chatting to like-minded people about non-academic stuff can be a lot of fun too. Music, films, videogames, books, new members, off-topic. Why not?

---

by: theduffman @ Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 02:56:42 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

misc (0.00 / 0)

I, too, like opportunities to discuss all kinds of things with like-minded people. Don't (meta-)ethical theories influence many or most areas of life? (I'm not sure I'm a utilitarian, but I like the meta-ethical theory that objective right and wrong might not exist, and I wonder if there's a community of people believing that.)

LiveJournal has both individual blogs and communities, with a tag system, at no cost, but it doesn't display the newest comments like this site. Care2, a social networking site specifically for activists, also has blogs and groups at no cost. Personally, I like the option of bringing up old threads, and I certainly wouldn't like to lose them altogether.

One topic I'm personally curious about is "procedural utility".

BTW, might Felicifia become less quiet when Giving What We Can is launched in early 2009? That and some other (practical) topics might interest many people regardless of whether they're utilitarians. Perhaps some people might also be interested in debating utilitarianism itself, but I don't know if Felicifia is a place for that.

---

by: Kletta @ Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 22:54:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Community/Topics (0.00 / 0)

re old discussions/academicness:

displaying old discussions is not something widely done, is it? People advise against "revival" of old threads and so on. Would it be useful to permanently display opinions on big timeless issues? Good question, may be.
- I'm all for reviving old topics.  One way we might be able to do this would be to "bump" revived threads up to the top of the front page.  This would take manual effort by the site moderator(s) instead of being automatic as in forums but that would certainly help the revival process.  I've never tried this before but it looks like this might be possible.  Someone propose an old diary to bump and I'll give it a shot.

Having said that, chatting to like-minded people about non-academic stuff can be a lot of fun too. Music, films, videogames, books, new members, off-topic. Why not?
- Fine by me.  We could include this in the community tag or start an "off-topic" tag or something like that.

--------------

re misc:

Don't (meta-)ethical theories influence many or most areas of life?
- Not necessarily - see e.g. The Triviality of the Debate Over 'Is-Ought' and the Definition of 'Moral'.

I'm not sure I'm a utilitarian, but I like the meta-ethical theory that objective right and wrong might not exist, and I wonder if there's a community of people believing that.
- That's more or less my view of meta-ethics.  See the discussion here.

LiveJournal has both individual blogs and communities, with a tag system, at no cost, but it doesn't display the newest comments like this site. Care2, a social networking site specifically for activists, also has blogs and groups at no cost.
- The LiveJournal communities (e.g. this) look like group blogs, which wouldn't bring any advantage over SoapBlox.  Care2 requires registration just to view the content, which would significantly impede others from viewing our work.  But both are interesting sites- thanks.

One topic I'm personally curious about is "procedural utility".
- What do you mean by this?

BTW, might Felicifia become less quiet when Giving What We Can is launched in early 2009? That and some other (practical) topics might interest many people regardless of whether they're utilitarians.
- There are a number of sites with similar enough content that we have to share readership/participation/etc with.  No way around that.

Perhaps some people might also be interested in debating utilitarianism itself, but I don't know if Felicifia is a place for that.
- I think Felicifia is certainly a place for debating that, though other sites may be too.  Disagreement is welcome here as long as it's reasonably civil.

---

by: Seth Baum @ Thu Aug 28, 2008 at 00:02:39 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

re re what I most want to talk about (0.00 / 0)

I think this site has an ok model.

They separate the fora into social and academic, though the management recently made the social fora invisible to casual surfers (if you want to see them, you can log in as username bugmenot password 123456), which, along with some other controversy, seems to have halved their userbase. I suspect it would draw more people into the site if you had the social forums above the academic ones, in any case. Hard to be sure though, for a site like this.

They also have a separate section for static content - mostly academic or semi-academic papers - although IMO they integrate it very poorly with the fora.

Re: resurrecting old threads, I think each forum sets its own policy. I've been on a few where the basic rule is 'don't do it unless you have something substantial to add or a pressing question', but you can always lock the most interesting ones at the top of the subforum in question.

---

by: Jinksy @ Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 03:34:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Re: Seth (0.00 / 0)

I disagree.  The most influential dynamic websites are mostly blogs, not forums.

It seems like a difficult thing to prove either way. Some stand-out blogs obviously do well, but IME if you give people a community, you give them the confidence to talk about their ideas in public. You also help turn the subject into something more popular, that everyone's willing to discuss - blogs (philosophy blogs, anyway) tend to be written by academics for academics or people interested in academic philosophy.

I suspect there's a large and mostly unreached demographic out there who don't particularly want to discuss the details of the theory (or haven't discovered that they do), but who think that it's patently obvious that all that matters is improving welfare. They might never want to get involved in the philosophical discussions, but might nonetheless like somewhere they can hang out and chat socially with people who don't hold ethical ideas they think crazy. That's the impression I've picked up from the secular forums I've been on before (and my own experience, fwiw) - most of the posters don't want to 'discuss' secularism, they're just there to meet like-minded people.

As David said, we want to think about marketing, not just creating a forum for public debate. And successful marketing also entails reaching just such casual interest groups.

In any case, wouldn't it be possible to have a forum that also offered a blog/diary feature? I know this forum does.

I've never found this site to be a hassle because my computer automatically logs me in, but that hasn't been the case for everyone.

I think you're underestimating your familiarity with this place. Registering was never a problem for me - it's something everyone on the web's done hundreds of times. It was subsequently, when I'd find myself overwhelmed with the topics, or having trouble mentally sorting them, or not wanting to bother with HTML coding, or not being sure how active a discussion was that I'd give up and move on.

However, I think previously the comparison was to other blog platforms like WordPress where you don't have to register and log into an account to post.  With forums (at least the forums I recall) you did need to go through an account, so that issue would not be changed.

I think the terms of registration are mostly up to the host (maybe it depends on the forum software too?). Some allow you to post without registering, though usually in specific forums. (Anecdotally again) The biggest hassle I find in registering for new forums is not being able to post immediately after registering and/or having to change your password from a forum-generated one. I think if you allow people to set their password while registering and immediately log them in having done so you'll encourage people. Presumably you'll get more spammers, but I doubt they'd be a huge problem on a small forum.

---

by: Jinksy @ Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 15:04:57 PM CDT

Re Jinksy (0.00 / 0)

You also help turn the subject into something more popular, that everyone's willing to discuss - blogs (philosophy blogs, anyway) tend to be written by academics for academics or people interested in academic philosophy.
I've always wanted Felicifia to be inclusive of both academics (philosopher or otherwise) and non-academics.  Perhaps a tricky task, but I think it can be pulled off.

re influence of blogs vs forums
- Perhaps the real difference here is not how much influence but what type.  I'd certainly be willing to believe that forums are more influential within a site's community, including by building a larger, more active community.  I'm not sure about this, but my guess is that's the case.  Certainly it's the case if compared to solo blogs instead of community blogs.  

But on the other hand, blogs are certainly more influential for beyond the community.  That is, people generally don't read forums unless they're part of that forum's community, but people often casually read blogs just for some updates and commentary, much like reading a newspaper.  With Felicifia there was some intention of using posts as societally-influential pieces on their own, which happens some with e.g. climateethics.org which I'm affiliated with through Penn State.  That could probably still happen, and I don't want to close that door entirely.

In going with SoapBlox, I was trying to get the best of both worlds: inclusive community and external accessibility.  It probably wasn't the best of both worlds, especially on the community side, but it was a pretty reasonable compromise.

One alternative- and this is an option worthy of consideration- would be to run two parallel platforms.  We own felicifia.org; we could set up a forum on that and see how it goes.  This would be different from the blog structure on Heathen Hangout in that the blog would be right on the front page instead of buried in internal links, to make it easier on the casual reader.

One reason to avoid running two parallel platforms is to discourage two distinct communities.  I would like one site for everyone, academic or otherwise.  On the other hand academics often aren't blogging anyways because we're usually putting all our writing energy into academic work (hence Felicifia's recent quietness), so maybe it's a moot point.

-------

I suspect there's a large and mostly unreached demographic out there who don't particularly want to discuss the details of the theory (or haven't discovered that they do), but who think that it's patently obvious that all that matters is improving welfare. They might never want to get involved in the philosophical discussions, but might nonetheless like somewhere they can hang out and chat socially with people who don't hold ethical ideas they think crazy. That's the impression I've picked up from the secular forums I've been on before (and my own experience, fwiw) - most of the posters don't want to 'discuss' secularism, they're just there to meet like-minded people.
- This is very interesting.  It's tough for me to say much because I haven't been active in the forums so I don't know what the vibe is.  What you describe does sound more like a forum than even a community blog like this.  On the other hand I have seen blogs, especially community blogs, function in this role.

I think you're underestimating your familiarity with this place.
- Quite possible!!!

Registering was never a problem for me - it's something everyone on the web's done hundreds of times.
- thanks, good to know

It was subsequently, when I'd find myself overwhelmed with the topics, or having trouble mentally sorting them
- In what way?  Because they were poorly organized?  Too many of them?  Challenging reads?

or not wanting to bother with HTML coding
- We can try turning the SoapBlox WYSIWYG editor on.

or not being sure how active a discussion was that I'd give up and move on.
- My sense is that this issue also exists on forums, but not to the same extent because when you comment on a forum it gets popped to the top of the list.  Would you say that's the case?

---

by: Seth Baum @ Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 20:31:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Re Seth (0.00 / 0)

It does sound like a 2-part site could be a good read, but is there any need to split it? One alternative is the standard web navigation menu, kept as simple as possible, so that on the default page you see perhaps blogs first (and blog navigation options), but with several references to forums, ideally using words like 'community' to make it clear they're not supposed to be strictly formal.

I don't know which would be better. Maybe it just depends on which you think is the more important issue - keeping the communities as integrated as possible, or making it as easy as possible for new users to join.

Actually, on reflection I suspect the latter option (ie split pages) might be best, since utilitarianism is a very specific minority issue at the moment, so everyone posting on the board is likely to have some interest in the blogs, and hopefully vice versa. That might also make it easier to expand the blogs section to include in-depth, static content (conceivably one day peer-reviewed?) where that's appropriate for a particular subject. infidels.org works as an example for that, although I think their website's design and especially navigation is quite poor for an organisation that size.

In any case, I think either approach would be a huge improvement on the current setup. I'm happy to contribute to running costs for either.

- In what way?  Because they were poorly organized?  Too many of them?  Challenging reads?

It's hard to pinpoint specific reasons and harder still to summarise them, but for a few egs:

1) Inconspicuous site-navigation menu in top-right (it's something that you'd normally expect to find on the web, and following trends is quite important to site usability - it's also smaller and has the same presentation as the external links, which is quite confusing)

2) Unfamiliar words in the menu - what's my page? whose home? what's a diary? (part of this might just be that I'm unfamiliar with blogging, but presumably others will be similar to me)

3) Lack of keywords found in the blogs I have seen, so it's hard to isolate specifics

4) Small default text, that stretches too far across the screen (IIRC according to Jakob Nielsen, you should aim to have no more than 11 as an average line length)

5) Slightly 'ugly' design in general and menu boxes in particular - not so much in a strictly aesthetic sense as in an unfamiliar sense. Do you have any experience with CSS? My own knowledge is very limited, but I seem to remember it being a fairly easy skill to pick up, that would give you an easy way to create a reasonably professional looking site that looked the way people expect websites to look (because so many people use CSS).

6) Too much onscreen noise (related to the small text, I think) - especially when the 'recent topics' bar appears on the left)

7) Too much white makes for a lot of glare

8) Unclear relationship between the main page and the 'diaries' page - there seems to be some crossover, but it's not clear what

9) Lack of customisability. I don't know how standard this kind of thing is, but many of the above problems could be mitigated if the site had an obvious 'sort by' dropdown, or more specific search options.

(it's a lot easier to name problems than suggest specific solutions, of course)

- We can try turning the SoapBlox WYSIWYG editor on.

I can't think of any reason not to, unless it might cause technical problems.

- My sense is that this issue also exists on forums, but not to the same extent because when you comment on a forum it gets popped to the top of the list.  Would you say that's the case?

I think the default forum style of moving a thread to the top whenever someone posts in it is very useful, as is the 'natural' (ie, again, familiar) placement of things like number of posts, date of last post etc.

Hope that helps,

J

---

by: Jinksy @ Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 10:22:47 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Site platform; site design (re Jinksy, Douglas.Reay) (0.00 / 0)

It does sound like a 2-part site could be a good read, but is there any need to split it? One alternative is the standard web navigation menu, kept as simple as possible, so that on the default page you see perhaps blogs first (and blog navigation options), but with several references to forums, ideally using words like 'community' to make it clear they're not supposed to be strictly formal.

Whether Felicifia is stretched out over two domains (felicifia.com & felicifia.org) seems secondary.  The important thing is that the blog & the forum (& any static content we might produce) is all tightly integrated as you describe.

...Side question: In forum platforms, does each comment have its own static url?  Here you can link directly to individual comments quite nicely, which I find a great feature for meandering discussions, such as this link right below here.

Re Status Quo (Douglas.Reay):

You might be right that the platform doesn't make that much difference.  But we won't know for sure unless we try something else out.  Although I will say that the current scheme is a big step up from the original Blogger site.

To that end it might widen your base not just to advertising it on academic philosophy lists and humanist discussion groups, but also in economic theory and medical ethics forums.  Perhaps start a thread asking for suggestions of people and places to contact?

I think the first thing is just to get the existing Felicifia community active again, which is in the process of happening through this discussion.  Certainly there were a number of very interesting discussions here when the site was more active.  Then there will be something here to attract a wider base to.  But I don't see any harm in any recruiting like you suggest.  I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would enjoy this site if only they knew of it.

---------

Jinksy, thank you for all these site design suggestions.  Some of them can be addressed within SoapBlox.  There is a modest amount of flexibility in the site design.  See the list of sites on "The SoapBlox Network" on the SoapBlox main page for other examples.  Be sure to check out the "Special SoapBloxes"- some really nice sites there.

1) Inconspicuous site-navigation menu in top-right
- This we can customize a fair bit.  If you can suggest a new look, we'll see what we can do.

2) Unfamiliar words in the menu - what's my page? whose home? what's a diary?
- This is all explained in the welcome message, which is linked to from the box in the top-left.  Perhaps this link should be made even more prominent?  Perhaps the welcome message page should be expanded?  Some learning curve will be inevitable though.

3) Lack of keywords found in the blogs I have seen
- By keywords, do you mean tags?  Posts without tags is just sloppy work.  If we want, we can go back and add tags to old posts and clean up the tags to make everything easier to sort through.  It's a project, but it can be done.  We can also make the tag guidelines more prominent.  Right now there's just a brief mention on the Post Formatting page.  I suppose here forums have the advantage of an automatic category tree structure.

4) Small default text
- I don't see an option to adjust this in the site controls, although there is a modifiable site css file.

that stretches too far across the screen
- This I think can be changed, although people can also just change their window size.

8) Unclear relationship between the main page and the 'diaries' page
- The diaries page includes those diaries that haven't been promoted to the main page.  The two pages are largely similar because we've been promoting almost all of the diaries to the front page.  We can remove the link to the diaries page for now if it would reduce confusion.

9) Lack of customisability. I don't know how standard this kind of thing is, but many of the above problems could be mitigated if the site had an obvious 'sort by' dropdown, or more specific search options.
- I haven't really been impressed by the built-in search in this site.

...
I think the default forum style of moving a thread to the top whenever someone posts in it is very useful
- I think this is great for active discussion sites but not for sites with lots of passive readers.  This gets back to the blog vs forum vs both matter.

---

by: Seth Baum @ Thu Aug 28, 2008 at 00:41:07 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Re: Site platform; site design (0.00 / 0)

In forum platforms, does each comment have its own static url?  Here you can link directly to individual comments quite nicely, which I find a great feature for meandering discussions, such as this link right below here.

I know that in some you can. It might depend on the forum software. On IIDB it's possible to link both to an individual post - http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/s... - and a post-as-anchor - http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/s...

I couldn't tell you how much, if anything, versatility costs.

Some of them can be addressed within SoapBlox.  There is a modest amount of flexibility in the site design.  See the list of sites on "The SoapBlox Network" on the SoapBlox main page for other examples.  Be sure to check out the "Special SoapBloxes"- some really nice sites there.

I had a look at half a dozen, and they mostly seemed to suffer from the same problems I observed here. Somehow the serif font on this site made it slightly more attractive to me than the others, but I'm pretty underwhelmed on the whole. I'm struggling to find a good example, but I think simple is best - I loathe the three-column style that seems to be universal across SoapBlox. Having trouble finding any examples that I really like, though. Maybe the web's moved on while I wasn't watching.  

As reluctant as I am to laud Internet Infidels design, I much prefer the whitespace on a high res you get from a page like this to to clutter you get from alternatives (animated ads at the top are awful, though) - if ads become necessary, they might fit best in a third column). Poll some people about this though, because I feel like I'm being old-fashioned here.

If you can suggest a new look, we'll see what we can do.

I would much rather move onto the new software if we're going to before getting too specific, or at least select the new software and learn its limitations. The one thing I'd definitely suggest in the interim is turning on SoapBlox's WYSIWYG.

This is all explained in the welcome message ... people can also just change their window size.

Thinking like this is very dangerous - the average web user (even at a site like this) is unwilling to read any kind of instructions and follows the path of least resistance to get to anything.

For example, one type of person you might attract to a forum is a procrastinating student who's surfing the web to avoid writing an essay (I speak from personal experience). He wants somewhere where he can strike up conversation or debate easily that doesn't feel like he's committing to anything, just casually commenting. I've got addicted to numerous forums in the past like this... if one had demanded that I read an introductory message and resize my screen before I figured out how to use it (as well as the standard registration options), I would have just moved to another without looking back.

You have to think in terms of users doing you a favour by coming here, not the opposite.  

---

by: Jinksy @ Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 07:01:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Comment is Free (0.00 / 0)

Ok, here's a blog look I quite like:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm...

They manage to fit a lot of data on the screen, but still keep the main text separate from the rest of the details, and leave a nice amount of white space around it.

---

by: Jinksy @ Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 09:03:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

SoapBlox (0.00 / 0)

Another very annoying thing about the current setup is the inability to edit your posts!

---

by: Jinksy @ Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 13:10:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

re: soapblox (0.00 / 0)

yeah absolutely.

---

by: theduffman @ Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 21:05:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

generic reply (0.00 / 0)

Looks like some good comments here, here, and here.  I'm looking at a couple days of busy-ness right now but after that I'll take a closer look at these and respond.

---

by: Seth Baum @ Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:36:30 AM CDT

Quick note on front page diaries (0.00 / 0)

So I just promoted Douglas.Reay's recent diary.  The way this site is set up, some people can post directly to the front page, and some people (not necessarily the same people) can promote other diaries to the front page.  If you want either of these privileges drop me an email.

---

by: Seth Baum @ Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:41:02 AM CDT

Status Quo (0.00 / 0)

I think the format is more or less irrelevant.  What you are trying to build here is a community based around discussing a minority interest topic.  It may never get very busy.  What probably matters more is its longevity, and that constructive discussions build upon each other, improving the quality of the resource over the years.

To that end it might widen your base not just to advertising it on academic philosophy lists and humanist discussion groups, but also in economic theory and medical ethics forums.  Perhaps start a thread asking for suggestions of people and places to contact?

On a technical note, allowing people to vote up or publicly link to other people's threads would increase interactivity.

---

by: Douglas.Reay @ Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 07:55:01 AM CDT

Re: Status Quo (0.00 / 0)

What you are trying to build here is a community based around discussing a minority interest topic.  It may never get very busy.

I'm very wary of this claim. If our aim is to build a community, then it's ultimately because we want to persuade more people of utilitarian reasoning, right? It's not so implausible, at least for those of us who think some kind of consequentialism is in some sense the most accurate way of looking at the world, to imagine a future in which most of humanity accepts some basic form of it. That's going to take much longer if we treat it as something you either want to discuss repeatedly or reject altogether. Everyone has some conception of ethics, and most people get on pretty well with those who have similar ethics to them, but they don't feel the need to discuss them 24/7. Why should utilitarians be different in that respect?

The best way to start getting people (beyond academia) to identify as utilitarians is to make an easy-access environment which they visit because someone links them, stay because the people seem like their type, and only gradually - if ever - get interested in the intricacies of the ethical discussions.

---

by: Jinksy @ Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 17:24:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Re: Future of Felicifia (0.00 / 0)

I think a forum would be best.
It might be a good idea to add a wiki. We could have stuff like analyses of different charities in it. Being based on utilitarianism, it would probably be very different than what would be put on Charities Wiki. It also would include POV stuff that wouldn't be allowed on Wikipedia.

---

by: DanielLC @ Mon Sep 01, 2008 at 18:02:22 PM CDT

WYSIWYG Now On (0.00 / 0)

I just turned the WYSIWYG on.  Comments on how you like it appreciated.

---

by: Seth Baum @ Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 10:29:24 AM CDT

Forum @ Felicifia.org (0.00 / 0)

So judging from everyone's comments here (thanks to all who have chimed in), it seems like a forum would be worth trying.  I propose putting it at http://felicifia.org so we don't have to worry about changing this site at the moment.  I also propose having Jinksy take the lead on the design and implementation of the site, since Jinksy's already really the one leading the 'Future of Felicifia' dialog and seems to have some ideas on how to implement a forum.  Any objections to any of this?

 

---

by: Seth Baum @ Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 10:33:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Forum @ Felicifia.org (0.00 / 0)

I think that would be a great idea if Jinksy is up for it. I really admire the fact that you are comfortable with delegating like that, Seth :)

I have quite a lot of free time at the moment so I resolve to become a regular poster on this forum. I'm very keen to provide feedback on the design, to moderate, to help design an introduction page, a rules page, subforums and so on and so forth. All you have to do is ask and tell me what you need done :)

---

by: theduffman @ Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 20:06:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Forum @ Felicifia.org (0.00 / 0)

theduffman, can you drop me a quick email so we can get your help setting up the forum?

---

by: Seth Baum @ Sat Sep 20, 2008 at 17:11:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Forum @ Felicifia.org (0.00 / 0)

hi Seth. Done.

I look forward to getting in contact with you via email and probably also instant messenger.

I hope Jinksy is involved too. The more people on-board, the merrier :)

---

by: theduffman @ Sat Sep 20, 2008 at 21:07:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Re: forum (0.00 / 0)

That's not quite the response I was expecting :)

 

I'm happy to give it a go, and if it doesn't work out I can pass it on to someone who can do a better job. If anyone feels that they can handle it more competently, please take over, either now or later. A few things:

1) For the next week or two I'll probably have very little free time, so there'll be little I can do til then.

2) When it comes to websites, I criticise better than I create. It'd (hopefully) be fun to learn how to put a forum together, but I'm starting from only rudimentary knowledge of html and DreamWeaver (which I don't own) - and no idea how much either is involved in forum creation. If anyone has any experience and wants to help me learn, I'd be glad to accept.

3) Ditto for forum software. This is the kind of thing Wikipedia's really useful for, so I found the inevitablecomparison page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Internet_forum_software_(PHP)

But such comparisons are inevitably sketchy. Does anyone have  positive experience with any particular software? A particularly good free one would be nice - failing that I'd rather get something that requires a one-off payment than a monthly charge, partly for psychological reasons, partly so I know what kind of investment I'm getting into.

 

---

by: Jinksy @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 14:04:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]