19 replies to this topic

[brokenportal]

Ide think it would be good to make a seperate "active topics" section for nooptropics and supplement stuff from the rest of the forums. Then the rest of the forum topics wont continuously get buried in the active topics section.


It might help that supplements section develop more into its own brand here like people were talking about in the name change.

[brokenportal]

Seriously though, nobody agrees?

What I could see is, when you click on "active topics" a side by side list of supplement stuff on one side, and sens type radical life extension stuff on the other side. Other wise supplements dominate and push out all other topics constantly.

Ive found people in myspace that think imminst is just a supplement place. If I were new here Ide probably think the same.

[lightowl]

I agree with this. Supplements are really not that relevant to life extension, unless something radically different was brought to market, and then it would probably be classified as a drug anyway.

I guess the "Selective" feature makes it possible to deselect the supplements forum, but its not really working effectively at the moment. I like the idea of splitting the Active Topics as a default option. Kind of like a primary and secondary focus thing.

This thread seems to be a testament to things getting lost in the flow.

[brokenportal]

This post is a testament to it I guess. I went looking for it. On the way I found some other interesting topics that hit a dead end by getting buried and I revived them. As for this "selective" feature you mention, Im not even sure what that is. Ill go look for it.

How do you all search the forums? 99% of the time I go to "active topics".

Supplements and stuff constantly bury radical life extension topics. What do you all think of splitting the active topics section into two side by side sections. I dont know if that can be done though.

I would not however, suggest having two seperate active topics sections that you have to click on because that might slow down the supplement sections action.

Any other suggestions? Maybe navigators can have a special function to help it along or something? A section just for all the "pinned topics" maybe?

[niner]

As for this "selective" feature you mention, Im not even sure what that is. Ill go look for it.

brokenportal, "selective" is exactly what you want. It lets you customize the active topics, so you can avoid looking at all the fora that you aren't interested in. It could be a huge timesaver. The problem is,

it's broken!

This is highly annoying. It does not work if you are using a really obscure browser, let's see, what was it called? Oh, yeah. Internet Explorer. But then, who would use that?

[brokenportal]

Even if the selective topic thing did work, most people wouldnt use it.

If I used it then the forums or topics I chose to view the most would still not be active because the odds that more than 10 or 20 percent of the people here that like the same topics would do that is pretty low. Although theres probably a solution with in that somewhere like maybe there could be a prompt that pops up on everybodies screen asking them to classify forums into two active topics catagories, "viewed often" and "viewed not so often" or something like that.

[lightowl]

It does not work if you are using a really obscure browser, let's see, what was it called? Oh, yeah. Internet Explorer. But then, who would use that?

I think perhaps around 90% are using IE simply because its default in Windows. I don't know about the ImmInst user-base. The Admin can probably give a more exact figure.

Even if the selective topic thing did work, most people wouldn't use it.

This is true unless it was prominently advertised, and probably still most people would not use it unless it gave a significant advantage.

there could be a prompt that pops up on everybody's screen asking them to classify forums into two active topics categories, "viewed often" and "viewed not so often" or something like that.

With a little bit of vision and some simple coding, this could be done automatically. The system could be monitoring what Forums you find most interesting by simply counting what Topics in what Forums you view. Of cause this would result in your selections favoring those Forums you often visit by promoting those forums to you, so a system of "lapsed visits" would be necessary to allow for the introduction of new Forums in your "favorites".

I think the easiest option would be, as you suggest, to simply prioritize forums by default in the Active Topics list, so as to have fx. 3 Active Topics lists.

Eg:
1. Community + Science & Technology.
2. Health & Nutrition + Society & Philosophy.
3. Free Speech

In addition, if one could opt to ignore a specific Topic, that would greatly enhance the Active Topics list.

[brokenportal]

Good suggestions. All these projects should probably be listed and prioritized. Theres always so much to do. Hopefully we can eventually, all of imminst, start breaking up into more and more project groups.

I suppose a first measure of order would be to see how many people even think that this is a good idea. I mean, if a function like this could double the participation in imminst discussion I think it would be greatly beneficial. Do you? Does anybody?






Heres a listing of Minds top six things to focus on for the second half of 2008.


http://www.imminst.o...008-t23268.html

1. F@H prize (continuation)
2. Convergence Conference
3. MFURI collaboration
4. 2nd printing of SCOD
5. Sunday Evening Update (continuation)
6. Front page content (continuation)



Ide like to see project groups focus on each one of those in particular, and Ide like to see project groups focus on creating their own lists of top 5 or so projects to prioritize and take on. But thats just me. I need support for this idea. Is anybody else for the same thing?

[lightowl]

Another idea that could bring the important stuff into focus. If every member could designate one single (or a limited number of) Topic(s) at a time the "most important topic(s)", those topics could be listed with high priority on the Active Topics page (or a similar page). The idea is to make members prioritize Topics actively instead of just giving topics stars. Because stars are unlimited, they are subject to inflation, so at some point too many Topics receive 5 stars. If members where to select their top 5 topics for example, and be able to update that list regularly. I think it would bring higher quality and more thought into that evaluation.

Edited by lightowl, 30 July 2008 - 11:27 PM.

[brokenportal]

This is a good idea. We should plot these out in a list by priority. Lets put that on the agenda for wednesday. We wont complete the list, but we can discuss it and start it. There are tons of good ideas floating around imminst dating all the way back to its inception that have dead ended, sometimes after no responses.

The point of splitting the active topics, to me at least, is pretty much to see radical ideas proliferate and turn into projects, then action, then reality right? So after thinking about this just now, maybe another way to get these topics moving more instead of that is to do like the board and this wednesday 4pm meeting and other efforts, and to break up into more task forces. Yes? No?

Next wednesday or before even, lets see if we can get more people coming with which to eventually, in the next couple of weeks, form more task forces. That way those people would meet for those particular topics, and then update the forum topic that correlates to it on a weekly type of schedule. Some groups could take on 2, 3, 4 or whatever amount of projects and correlating forum topics they can handle,

[lightowl]

Yea, project management definitely. I don't know how many people are actively volunteering right now, so it might be hard to split into multiple action groups. Perhaps we should look at how some of the other groups (transhumanist, life-extension, futurists) are managing their volunteer efforts. We might even want to spend some money getting organized.

Splitting of Active Topics seems essential at the moment. 90% of all threads on that list are Health related (that's fine for individuals, but bad for the group). We need a list that is more ImmInst Action (community) oriented. If splitting Active Topics is not popular, we could at least create a new page without all the Health stuff. There are simply too many Forums and Sub-Forums for people to look for news comments in all of them. Active Topics needs to be improved. The Topic Tracking feature is fine, but its really not effective to have it in email form. We should add a list of Tracked Topics to the Active Topics list ASAP. It would make a world of difference.

We should have the option to put this list on our Active Topics page sorted by new posts.

How can we get this done? Do we need Admin privileges? Do we need to make this an "Official" Project with an Action Plan, etc?

Basically I think we need this:
1. A test setup in which we can make direct changes to the code-base.
2. Support from Members and Directors to change/add Active Topics features.

This is really needed. I am willing to put in some (coding)time to make this happen.

Edited by lightowl, 31 July 2008 - 09:42 AM.

[brokenportal]

Yea, project management definitely. I don't know how many people are actively volunteering right now, so it might be hard to split into multiple action groups. Perhaps we should look at how some of the other groups (transhumanist, life-extension, futurists) are managing their volunteer efforts. We might even want to spend some money getting organized.

Splitting of Active Topics seems essential at the moment. 90% of all threads on that list are Health related (that's fine for individuals, but bad for the group). We need a list that is more ImmInst Action (community) oriented. If splitting Active Topics is not popular, we could at least create a new page without all the Health stuff. There are simply too many Forums and Sub-Forums for people to look for news comments in all of them. Active Topics needs to be improved. The Topic Tracking feature is fine, but its really not effective to have it in email form. We should add a list of Tracked Topics to the Active Topics list ASAP. It would make a world of difference.

We should have the option to put this list on our Active Topics page sorted by new posts.

How can we get this done? Do we need Admin privileges? Do we need to make this an "Official" Project with an Action Plan, etc?

Basically I think we need this:
1. A test setup in which we can make direct changes to the code-base.
2. Support from Members and Directors to change/add Active Topics features.

This is really needed. I am willing to put in some (coding)time to make this happen.

I think we can get more people to volunteer. If not action, at least time to meet in weekly project groups for now. I dont think other groups have volunteer organization other than contact lists and general ideas building from forums. Ill ask around though. Let me know if you get any info on that.

As for tracking topics, that is covered by the "Last 10" isnt it?

As for splitting, people have been talking about working this in as a solution for the name change too. Come to think of it that would be the best option wouldnt it? But how to go about it. I would say a good way would be to give both active topics sections a front page with their own name, and then keep Imminst, and let the Imminst front page link up to both of them.

So you would have "supplementworld.com" and "lifespan+.com" Each leading to the forums. The forums could then be divided with all the forums for one on top and one on the bottom in the "forums" listing with the title of their page above them. They would all still be in the group. We would tell people they are merged. "Imminst.org" would probably need a front page that are those two front pages side by side.

[lightowl]

As for tracking topics, that is covered by the "Last 10" isnt it?

No, last 10 is only your own last 10 posts. Tracked Topics is an unlimited list of Topics you want to track, regardless of your own participation.

As for splitting, people have been talking about working this in as a solution for the name change too. Come to think of it that would be the best option wouldnt it? But how to go about it. I would say a good way would be to give both active topics sections a front page with their own name, and then keep Imminst, and let the Imminst front page link up to both of them.

So you would have "supplementworld.com" and "lifespan+.com" Each leading to the forums. The forums could then be divided with all the forums for one on top and one on the bottom in the "forums" listing with the title of their page above them. They would all still be in the group. We would tell people they are merged. "Imminst.org" would probably need a front page that are those two front pages side by side.

In general I think this is a good idea. The main problem is that it requires too many policy decisions and additional restructuring. I remember discussions about doing this years ago. If we could start by adding simple features to the Active Topics page, like multiple focuses, I think that would be much easier (faster) to implement. It would also provide a test case to study what effects a larger restructuring might have on the community.

[brokenportal]

As for tracking topics, that is covered by the "Last 10" isnt it?

No, last 10 is only your own last 10 posts. Tracked Topics is an unlimited list of Topics you want to track, regardless of your own participation.

As for splitting, people have been talking about working this in as a solution for the name change too. Come to think of it that would be the best option wouldnt it? But how to go about it. I would say a good way would be to give both active topics sections a front page with their own name, and then keep Imminst, and let the Imminst front page link up to both of them.

So you would have "supplementworld.com" and "lifespan+.com" Each leading to the forums. The forums could then be divided with all the forums for one on top and one on the bottom in the "forums" listing with the title of their page above them. They would all still be in the group. We would tell people they are merged. "Imminst.org" would probably need a front page that are those two front pages side by side.

In general I think this is a good idea. The main problem is that it requires too many policy decisions and additional restructuring. I remember discussions about doing this years ago. If we could start by adding simple features to the Active Topics page, like multiple focuses, I think that would be much easier (faster) to implement. It would also provide a test case to study what effects a larger restructuring might have on the community.

Ide still say "last 10" works well enough for that. Why would you really need to track topics that your not responding to, and how much more can a person really handle on average than those ten last responded to posts at a time?

The splitting though would help get those last ten posts of yours more exposure so that when you come back, chances are somebody has responded to 5 of them already for you to continue communicating and problem solving with.

Testing out the idea by splitting the active topics first would probably best though like you say. In the long run though, when/if a name change is worked out and its decided that we implement it, the amount of work that would go into it would be a lot less because we wouldnt have to change the name on paperwork because Imminst would still be there over the top of the two.

Or wait, or would we still need the paper name change for soliciting funds with out conveying the negative aspects that come along with "Immortality"? Each sub site might need its own pay account etc..

[lightowl]

Ide still say "last 10" works well enough for that.

"last 10" does not show you if someone has commented on a thread you are participating in. Its not in "list form", but in "digest form", which makes it pretty useless for tracking from my perspective. Judging from our recent posts, we would have about 3 topics on our "last 10". Should that really be the limit of our focus? Its the tool thats too limited.

Why would you really need to track topics that your not responding to

That seems pretty obvious to me, and I do it all the time. I suspect there are plenty(most) of people who don't participate, but still follow specific topics. Why would you use Active Topics at all, if this was not the case? Tracked Topics is just an additional personal filter.

and how much more can a person really handle on average than those ten last responded to posts at a time?

I think you are grossly underestimating how much information a single person can handle. The tools a person have to handle that information is a factor. Also, not all Topics that one would want to track are necessarily very active. Like I said, why would you track Active Topics at all? It seems logical to me. To keep track of what is being said and done.

The splitting though would help get those last ten posts of yours more exposure so that when you come back, chances are somebody has responded to 5 of them already for you to continue communicating and problem solving with.

True, but in the long run it would still become a problem. Suppose we had 5 times as many people responding as now. A positive problem, I know, but it would have the same effect, even if Topics where split into a few focuses. Topics would be buried in no-time. Splitting into focuses is a good thing, but its not enough on its own.

Testing out the idea by splitting the active topics first would probably best though like you say. In the long run though, when/if a name change is worked out and its decided that we implement it, the amount of work that would go into it would be a lot less because we wouldn't have to change the name on paperwork because Imminst would still be there over the top of the two.

Or wait, or would we still need the paper name change for soliciting funds with out conveying the negative aspects that come along with "Immortality"? Each sub site might need its own pay account etc..

There is a reason the name change thing is so slow to happen. Its a political and bureaucratic nightmare. I think we should focus on small incremental improvement or we will get stuck like always.

Edited by lightowl, 31 July 2008 - 09:53 PM.

[brokenportal]

Small incremental steps, true. What do you think one of the very next steps we should take to move forward on seeing if this idea will work out or not is? Let me know and I'll help you get it done. Im going to look for a place to start putting together a makeshift list of bulleted projects as one next step. Im going to go look around now.

Ill take an idea like this:

Ide still say "last 10" works well enough for that.

"last 10" does not show you if someone has commented on a thread you are participating in. Its not in "list form", but in "digest form", which makes it pretty useless for tracking from my perspective. Judging from our recent posts, we would have about 3 topics on our "last 10". Should that really be the limit of our focus? Its the tool thats too limited.

and then begin plotting it out like this:

splitting topics
--do they need to be split?
----reasons to consider
------maybe feeding off each other is more beneficial in the long run
------maybe "last ten" should work well enough for that.
--------discuss whether we should poll it this wednesday and then make a decision
----------list the decision here
------maybe the "selective" option is all we need.
--------discuss whether we should poll it this wednesday and then make a decision
----------list the decision here

(Thats just one small small sample of the list, it would grow and split in a ton of ways)

Then for example, lets say we decide that not enough members know about these functions, then we may decide we need to maybe, send out a mass pm about it before polling it. Then we need to figure out if we should ask mind for mass pming ability or how to go about that, and then we would plot that all out in the list and go from there.

Then with lists like that we could take them into meetings. Im hoping we can use this wednesday meeting to break up into as many small task force regular weekly meetings as we can. With a list like that each task force, if they wanted to use that structure, could then ask people which tasks in the list they want to go complete before the next meeting, and then report on it the next week and sign up for more tasks. A person could take on however many tasks they wanted to take on. It could be one 3 minute task or five 5 hour long tasks.

[lightowl]

People seem to support it.
http://www.imminst.o...showtopic=23857

I suggest implementing a completely basic (single page) split as a beginning. Something like this:

(These a the current primary forums)
Top: Community + Science & Technology.
Bottom: Health & Nutrition + Society & Philosophy.

Perhaps with an option to flip their positions if users select it.

[brokenportal]

Do you mean just seperate the forums themselves to top and bottom? I dont think we would need to do that. I could be wrong.

I would rather just see two sub topics at the top of the "active topics" section, "supplements" and "radical life extension".

Although I probably wouldnt call it "radical life extension" I dont know what it should be called really, maybe that.

The thing is that, at least Ide be willing to bet, that most people search here primarily through the "active topics" section.

[eternaltraveler]

I haven't read all the posts here except the first.

I agree 100% with that. In fact it is something I brought up with leadership long ago.

[brokenportal]

I haven't read all the posts here except the first.

I agree 100% with that. In fact it is something I brought up with leadership long ago.

Im not familiar with this "referendum" thing at all? How do we start one? I say we start one to start a 20 day trial period with "supplements" as a sub section at the top of the active topics section, and "Indefinite Healthy Life Extension" as another sub section at the top of the active topics section. The forums would be separated with intelligent discretion by the person who does it, with all remaining forums reamaining scattered in the general "active topics" sections at the top of which the two new sub sections, "supplements" and "Indefinite Healthy Life Extension" appear. The final official names for them can be hashed out in the future.

After 15 days a meeting can be held to discuss the pros and cons of the new active topics sections, and they can then be decided upon to stay, or go back to the way it was on day 20.