Rating the forum

[Free Press Editor Joe Spear]

It's been about six months since we started this forum. Poll on The Free Press Web site is interesting. Some 62 percent said they would not use the forum for various reasons or find it "not useful, too much trash talk." Thoughts?

[Jonathan Kovaciny]

A forum needs a core of 5+ committed regular posters. We have two main posters (Dan and Bob) who are always tooth and nail at each other, and a handful of others (me, Liz, etc.) who post occasionally. I think that Dan and Bob's tendency to fill up a thread with half a dozen 6-paragraph responses to each other turns people away ... they don't want to read through all of that and feel there's no point trying to get a word in. I have plenty of responses in my brain to Dan and Bob, but I'm pretty sure that ONLY Dan and Bob are going to read them, so there's not much point in taking the time to type them. I doubt either is going to magically change their mind based on something I say.

If you want the forum to succeed, you need to make the registration process less burdensome, and offer incentives to get people to post, such as: registering on the forum gets you one entry in a drawing for $50, and reaching 15 posts gets you an entry in a drawing for $150. And so on.

Another way to make the forum succeed would be for a Free Press staffer to post the content of every news article and LTTE as a new thread so that we could easily comment on the local news. (The comment feature on the main Free Press site is annoying because comments take forever to appear, and I think they get deleted en masse after a while too.)

Getting this forum to be about LOCAL issues (or national issues as they affect the Free Press readership area) is important. There are all kinds of places on the net where I can discuss health care reform with hundreds of people; why should I come here? But there are not many places where I can discuss votes of our city council, our delegates to the MN legislature, etc.

[Dan Conner]

I think I mostly agree with Jonathon. To much of my forum participation seems to be spent responding to another poster. While I think an exchange of these ideas are really good for Bob and myself, I think they end up excluding other potential participants.

I think restricting the Forum to local issues would be a good way of addressing the important issues to The Free Press readers and yet avoid the rancor of the divergent political philosophies. I think our exchanges turned into an effort to proselytise. I think it did little to persuade, even though we learned about each other.

I think the Forum could deal more effectively with local issues, particularly if moderated and guided along the way. Then, threads should only stay open for a relatively short period of time. When meaningful participation has slowed, close the thread and move on.

[Bob Jentges]

It's been about six months since we started this forum. Poll on The Free Press Web site is interesting. Some 62 percent said they would not use the forum for various reasons or find it "not useful, too much trash talk." Thoughts?

Back on 4/7/09 in the "In the newsroom" catagory you posted a "Rate the forum" thread (similar to this thread) and in my post #2 in that thread on 4/8/09 I made some suggestions about guidelines to improve the Forum and increase participation. I stand by those suggestions.

As to Jonathon's comment about me being one to "fill up a thread with a half dozen 6-paragraph...", I think if you would check you would find my responses were essentially correcting missreprentations made by others of things I had posted, and defending against insults and ridicule of my principles, ideas, and person made by someone. As I have stated previously in this Forum, that is not why I joined. Moreover that is why I have not logged on to the Forum for day's, until I saw your above quoted post this afternoon. I can find many more satisifying and productive things to do with my time than argue.

Membership in the Free Press Forum is a privilege, not a right. If members choose to continuously look for an arguement, ridicule, insult, get personal, etc., the privilrge should be suspended. If after return from suspension the actions continue, the privilege should be revoked. There have been threats of suspension and/or revocation of privileges, but no follow through that I know about. Therefore last Wednesday I decided, for the second time, to suspend myself.

I will continue to spend my time responding to the "comments feature" Jonothan mentioned in the main Free Press site. I do that almost daily now, and have been for some time. But I agree with Jonathon it seems to take forever for those "comments" to show-up. Sometimes they are not printed until the following day, after the article, letter, Our View, etc., is no longer current. I would think most people read the online edition the morning of the publication. My suggestion is that "comments" made before 10:00 AM on the day of the article, etc., be added at 10:00 AM that day. "Comments" made after 10:00 AM on the current day could be added the next morning. That would mean a Free Press staffer could check the "comments" once in a 24 hour period, and add the "comments" that were appropriate at that time.

If I played any part in limiting participation in the Free Press Forum I am sorry. That was not my intent, but even patient people have limits. Many were the times I seriously considered not responding to posts I considered offensive. I speciffically recall one where I said something to the effect it was beneath my dignity to resopnd to some claims, and the reply was: "What dignity?" I should have had the sense to cease and desist then, but I did not!

[Free Press Editor Joe Spear]

A few points. We do try to approve the story comments twice a day, once on weekends. We should indeed be better about doing this, and we will do our best to improve.
More management of forum is also a worthy idea, especially around local issues.
Bob and Dan. Why don't you guys take a month off, say, and we'll see what develops. Maybe it won't need to be a month. I appreciate that you both are candid about your own frustrations. Other users have suggested I make this request of you.

[Dan Conner]

A few points. We do try to approve the story comments twice a day, once on weekends. We should indeed be better about doing this, and we will do our best to improve.
More management of forum is also a worthy idea, especially around local issues.
Bob and Dan. Why don't you guys take a month off, say, and we'll see what develops. Maybe it won't need to be a month. I appreciate that you both are candid about your own frustrations. Other users have suggested I make this request of you.

Joe, that's fine with me. Talk to you in a month or so.

[Robert Redding]

The strict membership guidelines are an excellent idea. I'm not big on using my name, but that's my problem. I fully understand the forum's intent in that regard. It's an excellent way to minimize trolling. It's also great for keeping one's thoughts in-check, lest we post something that could get us fired, ostracized, beat-up, etc...

As mentioned, more members might help build interest and posting activity. To draw members, consider a "recruitment campaign" such as a series of creative banners on the Paper's home page (http://www.mankatofreepress.com/homepage) (or at least in opinion/letters) about "getting involved in community discourse" or a play on "Free Press" (e.g. "Free speech makes our country great. Exercise your right here (http://freepforums.com/forums/)").

If you prefer to fish for folks with backgrounds to back-up their posts, spin the pitch to draw their attention such as "Expert in (insert timely topic or specific vocation)? Share your knowledge here (http://freepforums.com/forums/)."

The forum will be more useful to readers if they can participate – or at least find their visit interesting and informative. An entertainment component is good, too. But tread lightly. "Fun" is subjective. Disagreements can turn into offensive flame-wars at the drop of an ad hominem.

For those who'd join if they didn't have to use their legal name, maybe add a section that's less exclusive.

In any case, heavy moderation is important provided its fair and by-the-guidelines. Unfortunately, it's also exponentially time-consuming with forum activity. Good luck and keep-up the good work.