What Price Success? Improving Posting Quality on HPfGU

[dungrollin]

Dungrollin:
To start with, I agree with more or less everything that Carolyn and 
Kneasy said, though, unfortunately, I'm not convinced that there
is any way of implementing their ideas fairly.

On the read-only period for newbies:

Having only been a member of the main list for 6 months, perhaps I 
remember being a newbie a bit too clearly... I support this idea, 
but I wonder whether too-long a period on read-only would be counter-
productive. Although I would have dived into the archives and kept 
up with current postings and looked at the FPs, I doubt that I'd 
have hung around for a month waiting to post. I may have read the 
site avidly for a day or two, then forgotten about it, and 
remembered a couple of months later – realised that I could get
off read-only and posted something stupid immediately. A week would 
be long enough to ensure that I had at least understood the HBF and 
had an idea of the site, but not so long to be off-putting.

Additionally, I remember Kneasy suggesting on the main list a while 
ago that newbies should have to complete an exam before being 
allowed to post. I wouldn't go *quite* that far, but perhaps a
small questionnaire asking questions about the site, to show that 
they know how to snip, how to find an acronym in HA, to show that
they've read the FAQs and the HBF, to show that they know how to 
find the FPs and what gems are contained therein. After a week on 
read-only, they email their elf with the answers to the questions 
and ask to be allowed to post.  

Ginger:

Submitted for your approval:
1. Having new members wait until they are contacted by their
welcoming Elf before posting. 

2. An ADMIN to all members asking cooperation with:
Reading other posts before writing.
 
3. Creating a HBP FAQ, updated frequently, which all must consult
before posting. Howlers to those who ask oft-repeated questions.

Dungrollin:
Yes, I'm voting for Ginger.

kjirstem:
I do not like the idea of a 24-hour delay between post submission and
appearance on the list. Delays almost always have a destabilizing
effect, particularly in any system involving humans. One thing that I
think would happen is that many more people would reply to any given
post. There would be a period during which list members wouldn't
know if anyone else had replied or the content of replies, leading to
duplication of post content. 

Dungrollin:
This concerns me too, and is it not, effectively, putting everybody 
on moderated status?

On the three-post-a-day limit. 

The limit might cut down on the number of posts that simply repeat 
the poster's opinion, adding absolutely nothing new to the
thread. It might force posters to anticipate the arguments that 
others will have in response to what they're writing, and cause
them to put together a more thoughtful post about the possible 
reasons for disagreement on a subject, rather than merely stating 
their opinion – which, while interesting in that it informs the
rest of the list of their approach to the books, is really not very 
useful for generating interesting discussion – it's far more
likely to generate another argument.

My pet peeve is thinly disguised `me-too' posts, which really
add absolutely nothing new to a discussion. Because mee-tooing is 
not allowed people (rather than sending a literal `me-too'
off-list as they should) have this awful habit of padding a sentence 
of agreement out to a few paragraphs, so that it doesn't infringe 
posting rules.  They're a complete waste of time to read – it
drives me spare. 

I've just realised that SSS has posted similar thoughts – so
`me too!' But I wonder sometimes, that simple agreement
without adding anything useful to the debate is not allowed, whereas 
simple disagreement without adding anything useful to the debate is. 
Could `I disagree!' posts be just as outlawed as `Me
too!'?



Carolyn & Kneasy:
>>>- intervention when posters are making repetitive points that add
nothing to the argument
- move arguments on, by the timely posting of details of relevant old
posts<<<

Admin:
>>>*We* may be tired of certain topics, but we permit
newcomers to retread old ground because *they* are excited about it
and retreading that ground often leads to new ideas, and we don't
want to discourage that.<<<

Barb Roberts:
>>>Most of the debates have long series of quotes where It takes a 
bit of effort to discern who is actually said, but it's not usually 
worth the effort. These rapid-fire debates need to be controlled a 
bit, and the snipping should be shorter and so made less confusing 
to the causal reader.<<<

SSSusan:
>>>Since I'm not an elf, I've never felt comfortable contacting 
people and suggesting they take a discussion offlist, but I've hoped 
that the elves were doing that behind the scenes. <<<

Dungrollin:
I agree with all of the above. I would very much like to see more 
intervention on-list from the elves. I've never had a howler, and
to be honest, I think I should have, a couple of times. I would love 
to see people (including myself) told when they're arguing in
circles, told that it's becoming fruitless, or told that a
subject is OT and should be taken off-list. Amanda did this 
recently, and it worked (at least on me).

It's honestly difficult to see, you think "If I just phrase it
like *this*, they'll see what I mean, - it's clear that
they've misunderstood me - and it'll end the discussion..."
But of course it never does, because there is a genuine 
disagreement.  Rehashing the same arguments over and over again 
which effectively come down to "You're wrong, because I hate Snape" 
vs "Oh come on, it's a kid's book, you're *meant* to hate him..." 
*is* fruitless, though perhaps somewhat cathartic for those 
involved. 

I have nothing against people stating their opinions – it's 
obviously an important part of discussion, and although I'm
starting to get bored when the same subjects resurface time and 
again (particularly when it's the same posters every month or so),
it's when a single thread starts repeating itself that I get
really *annoyed*. When threads start going around in circles, I 
would like to see Admin step in with a "Please do not state and re-
state and state again your opinions when nobody is interested except 
the one person who is arguing with you and believes the opposite, 
and pretend that it is 'debate'." Though phrased more politely, 
obviously. – I'm not saying this only in judgement of others,
I'd like to be told off when *I* do it, too.

I wonder if an elf would be able to tell us how many howlers get 
sent per month? Do *all* one-liners result in an off-list reminder? 
How many people get put back on moderation? I honestly have no idea. 
While I was moderated none of my posts were returned or (as far as I 
could see) edited, and since I've never had a howler, I find the 
elves somewhat invisible (though, please don't accuse me of
thinking they do nothing, I do appreciate that they are very busy). 

Effectively, what I'm saying is, I wonder if fear of more public 
reprimands would embarrass people into thinking before 
hitting `send'. 



Kjirstem:
I would also like to suggest that encouragement of good posts might
help with both post and discussion quality. Inclusion in the
catalogue mentioned by Carolyn might be encouragement enough. Perhaps
the FP and Inish Alley played this role in the past? The drawback is
that encouraging good posts would require more work by list elves.

Dungrollin:
Ah yes. I'm all for positive encouragement rather than top-down 
enforcement of rules. But how could we make it work? A 
monthly `Fantastic post' poll, with butterbeer and chocolate
frogs for the winner? Would that make people try harder? 



Pippin:
>>
We had decided on a limit of three posts per day for the trial
period.

One thing I'd be glad to have input on is how we would measure
success. Posting quality seems too subjective to be measured
easily.<<

Dungrollin:
This is excellent news.  I think that Carolyn's `inclusion in
the catalogue' would be a good indicator, though since posting
quality and quantity varies so much from day to day and month to 
month, it would be difficult ensure that it is a fair comparison.  I 
think the only way is to see what happens the next time a SnapeWar 
or DursleyWar starts and see whether it's calmed, and made more 
interesting and less aggressive by the need to limit one's posts.

Posting quality *is* subjective and difficult to measure. I wonder 
whether an objective measure of success would be missing the point, 
somewhat.  Perhaps after a month of the trial, there should be a 
poll to see whether members want to keep or scrap the idea.  Those 
who are against the idea now may not be in four weeks time if 
they've stuck to their 3/day limit and found it improved their
post-writing. Others who are all for the idea now may find after a 
trial that it's too frustrating. Try it and see, I suppose.

So, sorry for the length of this, in conclusion:

I like the idea of a daily limit on posts per poster.
I like the idea of limits on newbies' posting, and somehow
forcing them to read the FAQs and HBF, or at least making sure that
they're aware of them.
I would like to see the elves interfering on-list more.
I would love some way of improving post quality through positive 
reinforcement.

Dungrollin
And sorry if this is a bit confused, I've got a head full of cold.