[- Dead threads, red threads, asynchronous cycles
|
|
By Aileen, Section discordia home improvement Posted on Sat Nov 15th, 2003 at 11:43:05 PM EURODISCORDIA TIME
|
In conjunction with comments on writing communal histories, Paul also raised a question about Discordia that I would like to address separately:
|
[ --------------------------------------------- ]
On Nov. 10, paullloydsargent wrote:
I've known about Discordia for some time now and I very much enjoy checking up on what people are posting, but I rarely have the time to read, much less post in blogs/lists/etc such as this. Not that I'm not interested, just busy with so many things and to some degree, hesitant to join in heated debates for the world to read. I've been a part of various other lists in the past and watched as my cycles matched those of the list itself. And here I go again, so to speak: I read a bit, step back and watch, finally post a few rabbid times, don't check for awhile, post some more, then often disappear.
As we have tried to explain in the FAQ and in various posts and comments about "hot/cold" or "push/pull" media - including Amy's post that Paul was commenting on - one of our aims in working on the structure of Discordia was to make it possible for people to engage in ongoing discussions at different levels of intensity, depending on time, interest, how comfortable people feel about posting in a public forum, etc.
Now I would be curious to hear from other people - especially any of the currently registered 331 users who have not yet posted anything - as to how well this works for you. Could adding the 13th comment to a thread from last June be a way for more reticent posters to come in quietly, so to speak? Or is only the front page interesting and everything else too much to read? How easy or difficult is it to slip in and out of ongoing discussions? |
[ --------------------------------------------- ]
|
|