04-16-2007, 06:01 AM
Preface:
Yeah I know, we aren't big on organization, but we still need it. We've had many ideas over time, but most of them soon became too unrealistic, and I think it's because we lack a quality control mechanism.
The Game:
A useful analogy is to think of the spread of ideas on AFF as a game with, rules, players, etc. Like all games there a metagame (the game about the game), which defines how the game would likely unfold. Though the players are a component the rules are more fundamental. Over a period of time people will post new ideas, as the rate increases the better ones get more attention, so there isn't much to improve there. For realistic ideas to grow we have to turn to the rules.
There seems to be a life cycle to these ideas. They start small then grow a fanbase that adds on new thoughts in an unorganized way each one more elaborate. What started as a simple idea has grown to be unworkablely difficult. At some point the plan runs into a dead end and is forgotten about. That's what happened to Aspergia, recently it's happened to the magazine, and if we don't fix the problem soon it will happen to the think tank.
The New Game
To fix the problem we need to make a new game; one that will, criticise ideas (and by that I don't mean "oh this will never work, forgot the whole thing") and organize big ideas into small manageable steps. Perhaps a sub-forum with specific type of posts, such as proposals and criticisms (the former being revised by the latter), as well some means to get them started in a small way. It should work better than what we have; I would be open to any input or criticism (yes, it starts here and now!) that anyone might have.
Yeah I know, we aren't big on organization, but we still need it. We've had many ideas over time, but most of them soon became too unrealistic, and I think it's because we lack a quality control mechanism.
The Game:
A useful analogy is to think of the spread of ideas on AFF as a game with, rules, players, etc. Like all games there a metagame (the game about the game), which defines how the game would likely unfold. Though the players are a component the rules are more fundamental. Over a period of time people will post new ideas, as the rate increases the better ones get more attention, so there isn't much to improve there. For realistic ideas to grow we have to turn to the rules.
There seems to be a life cycle to these ideas. They start small then grow a fanbase that adds on new thoughts in an unorganized way each one more elaborate. What started as a simple idea has grown to be unworkablely difficult. At some point the plan runs into a dead end and is forgotten about. That's what happened to Aspergia, recently it's happened to the magazine, and if we don't fix the problem soon it will happen to the think tank.
The New Game
To fix the problem we need to make a new game; one that will, criticise ideas (and by that I don't mean "oh this will never work, forgot the whole thing") and organize big ideas into small manageable steps. Perhaps a sub-forum with specific type of posts, such as proposals and criticisms (the former being revised by the latter), as well some means to get them started in a small way. It should work better than what we have; I would be open to any input or criticism (yes, it starts here and now!) that anyone might have.