Very much agree with your suggestions for healthy engagement with posts, thanks for writing them.
Also, FWIW, I’ve seen a lot less of a worrying trend towards criticism than I expected before joining the Forum team 4 months ago. Before joining, I had the idea that Forum users would tear ideas apart, sometimes in kind of harsh ways. I’d also internalised the meme that this was a reason for people not to post.
I’ve been pleasantly surprised by what I’ve seen. Specifically, if a post seems unsuitable for the Forum, or particularly ill-conceived, it is generally quietly downvoted rather than openly critiqued. In many cases, posts that I thought might be particularly open to criticism were given very helpful, good faith comments.
The more critical comments I’ve seen have been on the work of organisations rather than individuals. Although that might be difficult for the organisations, it also seems more fair—orgs are being funded for the content they produce, so it matters to all of us that it is as good and correct as it can be.
If anyone reading has the opposite impression, I’d love to hear about it (here or in DM).
Note: I am the content manager on the Forum, but these are my personal impressions, not those of the team.
it is generally quietly downvoted rather than openly critiqued
I’m not sure if this is better or worse. People often get confused and frustrated by downvotes without explanation (cf. the “Why am I being downvoted?” comments in response to one’s own comments, sometimes from fairly experienced users). And newer users are less likely to intuit the probable reason for the downvotes.
Is there a “Why might my post/comment be getting downvotes and/or little engagement” writeup somewhere? If not, maybe I should sketch that at some point as it might give people some general understanding to those users (and/or allow those offering feedback to do so more efficiently—“much of it relates to reason 3 in the writeup” rather than writing reason 3 out themselves).
Very much agree with your suggestions for healthy engagement with posts, thanks for writing them.
Also, FWIW, I’ve seen a lot less of a worrying trend towards criticism than I expected before joining the Forum team 4 months ago. Before joining, I had the idea that Forum users would tear ideas apart, sometimes in kind of harsh ways. I’d also internalised the meme that this was a reason for people not to post.
I’ve been pleasantly surprised by what I’ve seen. Specifically, if a post seems unsuitable for the Forum, or particularly ill-conceived, it is generally quietly downvoted rather than openly critiqued. In many cases, posts that I thought might be particularly open to criticism were given very helpful, good faith comments.
The more critical comments I’ve seen have been on the work of organisations rather than individuals. Although that might be difficult for the organisations, it also seems more fair—orgs are being funded for the content they produce, so it matters to all of us that it is as good and correct as it can be.
If anyone reading has the opposite impression, I’d love to hear about it (here or in DM).
Note: I am the content manager on the Forum, but these are my personal impressions, not those of the team.
I’m not sure if this is better or worse. People often get confused and frustrated by downvotes without explanation (cf. the “Why am I being downvoted?” comments in response to one’s own comments, sometimes from fairly experienced users). And newer users are less likely to intuit the probable reason for the downvotes.
Is there a “Why might my post/comment be getting downvotes and/or little engagement” writeup somewhere? If not, maybe I should sketch that at some point as it might give people some general understanding to those users (and/or allow those offering feedback to do so more efficiently—“much of it relates to reason 3 in the writeup” rather than writing reason 3 out themselves).