Timm Amstein

Student , TU Dresden

This conversation is closed.

Do we have to change the way we discuss on the internet?

A discussion is a vivid and passionate way to try to find the truth, behind a subject.
Today, after watching a talk, a documentary or a show nearly everyone shares an opinion about it with family, friends or the whole world. In times of facebook, blogs and twitter this comment can be seen by a lot of people.
The reactions to this comments are simply presented below the comment or simply in the thread.
Is this realy the most efffective way to do this?
If you didn't join the conversation early, to make a comment that is valuable to others, you have to read mostly all the contributions made by predeccors.
The effect is that in the end real discussions or even conversations only happen between two or three people.
Is this the real potential of the internet?
Creating the same size of discussion you can have in a bar only with someone around the globe?

I know, because the blog and thread system is so easy to implement and admister it is used nearly everywhere and it is the best wayto collect ONE way opinions, but it fails on the response part.
I think a good way to start a discussion with a GOAL, would be a interactive wiki approach, like the one google did with wave. So comments would be very specificly related to paragraphs or even sentences. Through try and error the document would grow. Very important, to speperate it from normal wikis, should be that the discussions and comments stay on the dokument. This way different approaches can be followed.
The result should be a dokument with a root like structure. I play Go sometimes online and there they use a similar system to find better ways of playing the game. I think online chess platforms use similar techniques.
The advantange would be that comments would be sorted and double statements minimized, discussion can have a real RESULT and somebody who wants to contribute can watch a document grow and open new paths or can simply accept the last state and contribute to that.

  • thumb
    Apr 28 2013: Yes, definitely. I have worked on this topic extensively since the 2008 financial crash (I work for one of the big’s and felt a deep sense of failure over leadership opportunities lost for us in the “know” or “could know” category). An important point to the topic is that it is not just a tool that is needed, but also different ways of thinking and acting. There are many themes: diversity, thinking for the group, leadership, structure, and recognition of the full bandwidth of our experience (intellectual, emotional, artistic, and etc.).

    The comments about lack of moderation and wading through 10,000 comments are very important practical considerations (“How can we achieve like ants?” is a potent question in collaborative intelligence). Wiki creation is not the full answer, since it assumes one view can be formed, which is truer of science as opposed to human problems. Search for web using the words “disagreement success Keyes” and you may find some food for thought from the peace and reconciliation space. A final thought is around freedom. With the usual internet chat we have freedom constrained by chaos -too many choices and voices that you cannot easily organize and navigate and react to or interact with in time to be effective. Other parts of the internet are closely walled, so you cannot interact very much or with very many, but your response is more likely to have an impact -just in a narrow area. So is effective internet dialog a freedom optimization problem –finding the right balance for the purpose at hand of inclusiveness vs. exclusiveness, structure vs. openness, and etc.?
  • thumb
    Apr 7 2013: Thank you Greg! Maybe I have chosen a too difficult and theoretical approach because we learned it like that at university. I think to simplify my argument I will use the Ted talk conversations as an example.

    I think that the comments below the TED Talks and also TED conversations are sometimes very frustrating. If I watch a brilliant talk which infuses thousands of new ideas questions and possibilites in my head I can comment below the talk or start a conversation. But the conversations are no real discussions. Its only a one way show because my and 50 other comments can't be replied in a thread.
    I think we should search for a more efficient approach to enable discussions for many people at the same time. Because that is the advantage of dicussing online and not in a bar. I can discuss with many different people with diffferent opinions culture and so on...
    Also what is frustrating is the fact that if i watch a talk, a week after it was published, i have to read a huge amount of comments and opinions in the most unorganized way I could imagine. I would have to spend hours of my time. We need a process which enables to organize summarize and structure the conversation so that you can point out specific problems.

    Because if I see a brilliant Talk there are most of the time 16 minutes of amazement and 2 that i don't understand or don't agree on and if I want to point that out and solve this problem with all of you I have to use this system or ignore my douts and thats not very satisfiing.
  • thumb
    Apr 1 2013: I get overwhelmed with noise, one has keep focussed otherwise you turn an interesting conversation into a time waster of your time. Good idea. One day the kids will grab a conversation and ask specific Q's of the conversation itself. I'm not being facetious but believe they will try for this and someone will figure it out and start an evolver. One day.
  • thumb
    Mar 30 2013: I think you have an excellent initial idea, but your explanation is too complicated. Can you simplify?
  • thumb
    Mar 28 2013: Have you ever participated in one of the TED Conversations chats that are open live for something like an hour, typically with an author of a newly-released book and moderated by a TED staffer? It is still online- no visuals.

    Doesn't Google plus have a conferencing capability that people can use in this way by arrangement that does include voices?

    I know some online course providers (not the MOOCs) teach via a live discussion board or interactive whiteboard onto which all the members of the class can post live.
    • thumb
      Mar 29 2013: I never attended one of these particular TED conversations, but I think they are a special case. Because of the fixed time limit most of the active players will be be there from the beginnning. If thats the case the discussion between many people isn't the problem, because everyone can follow everyone. I want to pick up that example to emphasise my point. I think it would be really hard for me to contribute effectively, if I join the one hour conversation at the 35th minute. because i can't go through all the comments made before in this short time and i don't know what the status of the discussion is.
      I also think that a conversation about a given book is more stable and not as likely to change, as a talk about an open subject, where very diffferent opinions and standpoints can clash. By that, I mean that a given text gives room for dispute, but also gives constraints that some other conversations don't have. I think the important factor here is the limited time which gives stability.
      Also I want ti ask back to you if you think that these discussions were held in an efficient way?.

      The google hangouts and google drive use many of the techniques to solve this problem i think, but the problem is that this technology is based on project work. You have to organize a hangout or a project group to work on drive in order to work effective. Also in online courses coordinated by companies and other organizations. I think the main factor here is the limited number of people, who can access the technology. The software they use is, maybe very efficient for project groups or classes but are they capable of handling contibutors on massive scale?
      I attended a lot of cousera courses (MOOC) and I have to say I am dissappointed about the discussion forums because, the effect of 10000 people trying to discuss about one question is that these forum can't provide a proper presentation and guidance. That's one of the reasons i started this conversation.
      • thumb
        Mar 29 2013: I have not participated in one of the TED book chats either. Perhaps someone will respond to you who has.

        I did one Coursera course in Fall in which I tried the discussion board. I too was greatly disappointed in that aspect of the course. The discussion board was also entirely unmoderated, so it just seemed like one would have to wade through lots of socializing to find anything substantive and people were often not able to help each other effectively. Not for me.

        From what I understand, those who are following the MOOC providers see substantial variation in quality of Coursera courses, so some may have better functioning discussion boards than others.

        EdX (MIT/Harvard/Berkeley) does their online discussion differently. In addition to their discussion board, in which both paid and unpaid TAs also participate, they have appointed times for what they call TA office hours which are scheduled times for live discussion. I don't know how those work with tens of thousands of potential participants.