Thread Mode tends to be hard to read: Posts are often out of historical order, you can't always figure out who said what or when one speaker stops and another starts, time sensitive information is mixed with timeless wisdom, opinions are mixed with facts, and personal debates are mixed with public discourse. Thread Mode material tends to grow quickly and organically. Adding to it while keeping it clear is difficult. It's hard to avoid Unethical Editing when trying to clarify things later and almost impossible to avoid it while a debate is raging. There are many words used in support of discourse that aren't needed for later reading. These words are very difficult to extract.
Therefore:
Sign Thread Mode contributions:
Thread Mode is like a conversation. People like to know who they are talking to. Signatures also work to delimit posts and provides cues to readers about what position the writing is meant to support. Not terribly important for short, simple threads; more important for longer, multi-party threads.
Use a Null Signature for anonymous contributions:
Put in a Double Dash to delimit the post but don't add your name. [Proto Pattern] Or just sign it "-- anonymous".
Use separate posts for separate subjects:
If each thing you write has a single subject then it will be easier to move and respond to in the future. A separate signature isn't required, paragraph breaks should be sufficient.
Quote and respond:
Instead of writing responses inline (Inline Interjection) and destroying chronological order. Copy the inspiring material to the bottom of the page and respond to it separately. This makes it easier to follow how the ideas were developed later.
Use horizontal lines to delimit threads:
Allows some relaxation of chronology preserving techniques. Each thread develops its own idea.
Well written Thread Mode won't solve the whole problem. Sometimes Thread Mode just isn't the most appropriate way to explore a topic. Other times Wiki just isn't the right place for a conversation.
Therefore:
Don't write it:
Ward writes in Wiki History that he's always encouraged Dissertation Over Discourse on Wiki. Discourse is easier, of course, and comes in handy. But it creates Thread Mode which can be hard to read. Prefer to write in Document Mode when possible.
Use email instead:
Write email directly to the person that you wish to respond to. Do this especially when the topic is not of general interest or will require wordy negotiation.
However
Thread Mode won't always be written clearly. Even if it is it probably won't stay that way if only because it will get too big. The ideas presented in Thread Mode are usually valuable -- often they are the most valuable contribution to a page -- but Thread Mode form isn't always the best way to convey that information to the reader.
Therefore:
Break up posts by subject:
Take a single post and break it into two separate posts with one subject each. Place a copy of the original authors signature on each. Often there will be a few words or even a sentence or two that was originally used as a segue -- they can usually be deleted or modified to form a pointer from one post to the other [try to use a page link for this, they introduce weaker coupling]. Often one thread can be broken into two separate threads using this technique.
Convert Thread Mode To Document Mode:
This is very difficult to do well and will likely raise the ire of the Thread Mode authors if done poorly or without their permission or knowledge. However, when it's done well and in context it provides one of the highest quality forms of information found on Wiki.
Extract inline responses:
Just like quote and respond above but done on behalf of the responding author. This will rarely restore chronological data but it does work to clarify threads.
Organize threads:
Group threads by subject. Merge them into the same horizontal line delimited section if possible. [Proto Pattern]
Label threads:
If sections have titles they can be found more readily. That aids both in contributing to and reading Thread Mode.
Extract thread to another page:
When you would never guess the name of a page from the content of a particular thread on it, move that thread to a more appropriate page, leaving behind a pointer to where it went. Topic Drift.
Extract thread to new page:
Usually these pages contain the word "Discussion" in their names and are completely Thread Mode. This reduces clutter on the original page (which should contain a pointer to the new page) but may only serve to move a mess to a new location.
Create dialectic:
Reduce the size of a thread by reorganizing, merging and editing the posts to form an expositional representation of the original conversation. Change the signatures to be Dramatic Identitys. Optionally associate the signatures of the original authors with the Dramatic Identitys. (See also Thesis Antithesis Synthesis.) [Proto Pattern]
I label threads but I don't know how many other people do. It may just be a Proto Pattern. I also think that Wiki might benefit from having an email list associated with it so that we'd have a place to dump Thread Mode or collaborative editing conversations. I would love to know more ways to improve Thread Mode without destroying its content. We especially need norms for converting Thread Mode to Document Mode. I think that it's clear that a question (especially an anonymous one) can be deleted and its answer incorporated into the existing Document Mode. What other kinds of thread can be collapsed into Document Mode. Are there kinds that can't? -- Phil Goodwin
When a thread is demonstrating a principle instead of describing it, collapsing into document mode loses the immediacy of the original perspective. I don't know of anything that can't be collapsed into a description at some level of abstraction, if you're willing to accept that. People here seem to be pretty good at that, but it's a little removed from the topic of this page, which seems to be about writing better Thread Mode in the first place. Another page that steps onto that turf is Thread Mode Falsely Blamed. -- Walden Mathews
Of course there are also many of us that do not think Thread Mode is falsely blamed and believe in dissertation over discourse on Wiki. Many feel that a way to improve Thread Mode is to use software meant for Thread Mode like News Groups. This doesn't imply the elimination of creating threaded discussions on Wiki, it just reduces their relative importance to dissertation. --
I believe in Dissertation Over Discourse as well, although not the way you do I suspect. I too believe that Document Mode is generally more valuable than Thread Mode and therefore put it physically above Thread Mode. But I think that Thread Mode Has Value and I wouldn't just throw it away. -- pg
There's much resident software expertise not being applied to this problem, but in particular, the notion of starting with quality and maintaining it rigorously has yet to be fully explored. These threads are only marginally self-moderating at best. The notion of moderators seems somehow unWiki-like, but I suspect that something in that direction is the ticket. I'd offer myself modestly in that role as an experiment, but modesty's not in my bag of tricks ;->. -- Walden Mathews
The Wiki community has vigorously rejected virtually every attempt at governance. We have no shortage of volunteers to be governors but we seem to be a bit low on volunteers to be the governed. -- Phil Goodwin
I wasn't talking about governors, just helping hands. For instance, if I thought you and I were about to break into fisticuffs here, I might invite Richard to help guide me, you might invite someone to help you (or you might not feel the need), and/or we both might agree on one third party to help us both. It would be for the duration of the current topic only, then we'd all part friends. Of course, "people on Wiki" will never do this...until someone does. Never say never. Also see What Is Thread -- Walden Mathews
I think that's an excellent idea, Walden, I've started Invite Moderation in order to explore it further. -- Phil Goodwin
A page of this title ought to be able to say more than just "don't" or "do it elsewhere". Ironically, those arguments belong elsewhere...on this Wiki, but not on this page. -- Walden Mathews
"Don't" and "do it elsewhere" are strategies that resolve the forces introduced. They are surprising results and that is exactly why they belong right here on this page (although I admit the suggestions for how to actually write thread mode well are made more obscure by them). -- Phil Goodwin
Yeah, I should tone down my judgment of these strategies, as you suggest. They're a little extreme for the forces under scrutiny, though. By contrast, "How To Handle Chlorates: Don't" is an example of a worthy, real life-and-death situation (which I should have heeded as a youth, but by grace of god I'm still here anyhow). As you pointed out, the obscuring of hope is my real beef above. -- Walden Mathews
Pull the inspiring material out of line at the bottom of the page and respond to it separately
Always appending to the end is a Proto Pattern. --
Actually it's not. It's one of the earliest norms on Wiki - so old that it may have been lost through Wiki population turnover. It's tried and true. It succeeds in large part because it means that comments are read in roughly the same order in which they were written. This improves readability dramatically. --
In some cases, for example where an insert is too long or leads to a nested response, readability is improved by this pattern, agreed. On the other hand, the ability to interject something in a Different Voice, whether signed or unsigned, within existing Thread Mode or Document Mode, is one of the greatest and most wonderful freedoms on Wiki. Like all freedoms, it can be abused [wot like this? no that's just you talking to yourself], indeed badly abused. One of the better Patterns Of Interjection [note: please insert an expanded version of this sentence in that page if it's worth creating] is to point out the relevance of an existing page or to include a Prompting Statement. High quality (often highly amusing) interjections are one of the reasons that I consider Wiki much better for writing and editing Thread Mode than newsgroups. Particularly the editing. -- Richard Drake
I think of such interjections as a very strong seasoning: A tiny bit here and there can make things delightfully more interesting, but if too much is used, or used in the wrong place then the dish is ruined. I have found Inline Interjections to be particularly unappealing when they are used to weaken a case as its being made. When reading such a work it is as if one person is continuously talking over another who is trying to make a point. As in speech it is much more pleasant and effective to save your comments for the end. Also an Inline Interjection on an Inline Interjection is certainly too much spice in the recipe. Here is a conversation that needs room to take place but has none because it is in a space already occupied by another conversation. These deserve their own place in the world and should certainly be extracted to the bottom of the page (or to their own section). But let us not be too hasty or too zealous lest we commit ourselves to a world of blandness. Let's scan a piece that contains an aside and see if we cannot see the value of it before we yank it from it's place. I think that often we will not see value and will be more satisfied to give these words their own home, but if we do not hesitate and consider then we will do harm when we meant to do good. -- Phil Goodwin
Sorry not to interrupt, but is the Meaning Of Double Dash evolving in a somewhat ghostly fashion around here? --
It's probably someone making a suggestion through example rather than creating eight or nine new Wiki On Wiki pages to discuss it to death. They will probably just stop doing it if it doesn't catch on. --
Somewhere around here I have proposed that after heated debates seem to have cooled off, a parallel topic is created in which a "clean" version is built based on points from the threaded one. After most seem satified with the clean version, then the original one is removed or turned into a "discussion" topic. I don't recommend cleaning be attempted while the process is still "bubbling".
--
See original on c2.com 