Advertise on ChoralNet
Congratulations on an outstanding makeoverDate: June 19, 2009 by Bill Paisner
 I was once a regular contributor on the Usenet group and
stopped contributing once the link to ChoralNet was dissolved, due
to many moderation problems that had nothing to do with content. I
am very pleased that the new Choralnet II is so well designed with
a surprisingly small number of initial problems. It's truly a
useful tool now and I expect to be active in it. You've really done
a great job in defining the forum categories - look at the
distribution of messages. My only concern at this point is a small
one that I have voiced before. It is too easy and often
counter-productive to allow posters to restrict replies to be
private. Unless it's a direct request to borrow something, it
doesn't make sense and it violates the whole idea of ChoralNet
sharing. Perhaps this could be handled informally by the moderators
or by a popup, triggered by a request for private response, which
explains the sharing principle and asks, "Are you sure?" or
something like that. Replies (21): Threaded | Chronological
Allen H Simon on June 19, 2009 1:18pm
Thank you for your positive words. Several others have expressed frustration with the "private response" option for the same reason. I do want to emphasize that the current system is already a big improvement in this regard over Choralist, where everything was "private response" and we had to rely on subscribers to compile the responses they received and publish the results.
Your idea of having an "are you sure" option is intriguing, but at the least we'll review the description of the "private response" option to emphasize that it's only intended for confidentiality issues and the like. I have a suspicion that some users check the "private response" box because they don't want to have to (a) return to see the responses or (b) manage their subscriptions to receive the replies. More user education is called for.
on July 1, 2009 7:33am
I agree with Bill. The beauty of ChoralNet is it's collaborative aspect for the world of choral musicians.
on July 1, 2009 9:43am
I like Bill's suggestion of an "Are you sure?" prompt that gives the rationale for keeping as much of the informatiion public as possible. However, I also think it's good that we give our users the choice to receive things privately, and trust that if we encourage them to "share the wealth" when appropriate, just as we did in the Choralist days, that they'll cooperate. I can think of various instances where private responses make sense (surveys, etc.), so we shouldn't go to the extreme of making everything public, but as Allen says, we should do our best to educate the users as to what to make public and what to make private -- there's room for both.
on July 1, 2009 9:46am
p.s. - here's a good example of one where the author approprately opted for private responses:
DT
on July 11, 2009 6:32am
Actually, I'm not sure I agree. If this was a public discussion, he'd probably get more people involved because they'd see what others had posted and want to add or rebut. And everyone would benefit. Besides, the way he's doing it, he'll write an article for the CJ, never credit ChoralNet as his research tool, and ACDA will be seen as the source of all this great information.
on July 11, 2009 6:38am
It's a survey...not a discussion. And the responses are intended to be reported anonymously when compiled into the eventual article, so if this was forced to be public, people could pick up the journal article and then identify who said what by the information published on our site. My point was that a survey-type query is MUCH more suited to private respnses. You don't rebut other people's answers to a survey.
on July 5, 2009 9:17pm
If it's mandatory that all responses are open, I think some people just won't respond. I agree with David that we need to give the option of private response
on July 8, 2009 4:31pm
Sounds like this is a feature that is no longer open for discussion regarding whether or not to implement; but rather *when* to implement. Philip and Allen, I leave that to you
on July 8, 2009 10:47pm
I take it you're only talking about the popups asking if they're sure they want private responses?
on July 9, 2009 9:44am
No, about direct responses in general. Am I reading this incorrectly? It seems that you, Brigid, and Philip all think that such a feature needs implementing.
on July 9, 2009 11:20am
You're right about Brigid, but I'm thinking that Philip was actually agreeing with Bill that we should *avoid* private responses in most cases...Philip?
on July 9, 2009 1:56pm
"Avoid" is a pretty meaningless word. We're allowing users to decide for themselves whether to request private responses. Our options are:
I'm a little reluctant to implement an additional "are you sure" screen (or popup window) since it's inconsistent with our user interface anywhere else, but I'll do it if everyone strongly wants it. I'd encourage moderators to review the list of "private response" messages posted on the moderators' forum to see if you think it's really a problem.
Actually, there's a fourth option: we could contact users who submit "private response" messages that we think should be public and encourage them to change it themselves before their message is approved. (Sounds like another form letter; David's keeping track.)
Reminder to moderators: this conversation is on a public forum. We're not discussing anything secret, really, but just keep it in mind.
on July 10, 2009 6:53am
Not sure why you think that "avoid" is meaningless, Allen...I think it's exactly what Bill was asking for. He appears to think that all responses, except in the case of borrowing requests, should be public. But, semantics aside, your three choices aren't the only options. I think a better option (other than leaving things as they are) would be for the system to generate an email message to anyone who opts for private responses to a forum post. That email would remind the user that we're all about sharing information, and that if they receive information privately that might be useful, they should consider posting a followup to the same forum, somewhat like the Choralist compilations. That way, people would still have choices, rather than moderators making decisions as to whether or not they're allowed to receive private responses.
on July 10, 2009 2:21pm
There's another way that public responses are a problem: when someone posts a request for repertoire, often more than half of the responses are from composers flogging their wares. After a long list of responses has appeared in the thread, the original poster often goes down the list, responding to each composer individually, but in the public thread. There's no guarantee that the composers would ever see these messages (unless subscribed to the thread), and it has created problems where a poster write positive responses to some composers and then doesn't reply to others. I don't know how we train posters to respond privately to respondents, but I question the value of getting a dozen messages from the original poster with comments like: I'd love to see it. Please sent it to me., etc. Any idea how to fix that sort of issue? And should this discussion be moved to the moderator Wiki?
on July 11, 2009 3:52am
Please keep the private response option! Additional guidance
on what is appropriate for public and for private would be welcome.
I have used both -- public for replies of likely general interest
to people monitoring a particular thread; private for responses
that seem too detailed or insignificant to matter to most readers.
Often, I have been one of those composers flogging my wares (hi,
Frank!) and sought to give a director specific information that
would just clog up others' in-boxes. The knowledge and commitment
of ChoralNet members is impressive and most strike a good balance
in what they choose to contribute publicly, it seems to me.
on July 13, 2009 1:13pm
I've asked Philip and he favors an "are you sure" pop-up. But Frank's concern is valid. Brigid, I'm not sure I understand where you're pointing us to....("second Forums item"? maybe it was gone by the time I got there).
on July 13, 2009 3:10pm
This site is the greatest!!
Here is an offering from a newby of diplomatic language for the privacy issue that states the case for open posting while respecting the absolute freedom of anyone to keep it private.
"Our readers benefit from reading the postings and responses of colleagues like you on these forums, however you may choose to receive comments to your posts privately at your discretion."
|
Help support ChoralNet by buying via these links
|
