TED Conversations

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

How can we as the TED Community/post contributors better utilise previous closed conversations & their ideas worth spreading?

On a recent (Do jails rehabilitate?) I posted, it came to light that many other conversations had much the same theme. Furthermore it then became apparent to me that there would be a lot of duplication/overlap and that what we effectively have is, a conversational recycling centre/center....without the benefits one usually associates for society from recycling.

If the vision of TED is for "Ideas worth spreading", then how can this translate into those stashed/stored/closed conversations being incorporated so that an idea is consistently refined via the new live posts.

If society is to grow, then the TED environment may well provide a very effective conduit for societal change, by way of idea development, then public/government integration/introduction to the refined idea.

In Democratic Countries, people can sign petitions supporting ideas (worth spreading) and goverment representatives can run their election campaigns on the back of committing to deliver them if they are not yet an elected public representative, or if already a representative because they agree with the idea too.

With the support of YOU as a part of the TED Community and your advice on how the above may be best achieved, my aspiration is that TED will then adopt the strategies and we will have even BETTER Ideas that will be really worth spreading into society at large in a very influential and positive way for the future of our planet.

Of course, if there are already exactly the same posts stashed/closed can you provide me the link? : D

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Aug 1 2013: btw i just realized. you don't have a right to complain about that. you are the only one that can still participate in those closed conversations. this assumes your choice of name is accurate.
    • thumb
      Aug 2 2013: Sorry Krisztian, I am a bit confused by your last. Am I right in thinking you mean that a person can participate in a closed (any) conversation in so far as they can read all the posts that are contained within it and also determined upon their accuracy of searching relevant topics?

      If this is this the case, then I'd agree, I have no right to complain, simply because, that is how things work here at the moment.

      My objective is more aligned to improving rather than complaining, in so far as, I think the above scenario can be improved upon by taking out the manhours required for an individual to research subject material here as described above, to one, whereby, via keyword linkages or similar there would be links to these closed conversations whenever duplicititious remarks are made or closely related to topics.

      In this fashion refinement of ideas can occur, to ultimately craft a higher grade response, which if appropriate could hopefully/potentially, be rolled out into mainstream society. Hope this clarifies! : D
      • thumb
        Aug 2 2013: you can just go back in time, dude
        • thumb
          Aug 4 2013: I did... I put a reply up to yours and then travelled to the future and went back in time to your response, which I dissappointingly discovered was void of anything worthwhile or contributory to concurring that I had correctly gauged/interpreted, what you meant by your first post and subsequent abscence by way of your last with respect to furthering understanding and ways to improve the staus quo.

          Needless to say, I will go forward in time and then come back in time to see if your reply has a little more substance next time around....or maybe it may all just be lost in the translation! : D

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.