|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <52BB5C09.1030100@arx.li>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Lodewijk_andr=C3=A9_de_la_porte?= <l@odewijk.nl>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 02:10:27 +0100
To: arxlight <arxlight@arx.li>
Cc: Greg <greg@kinostudios.com>, cryptography <cryptography@metzdowd.com>,
ianG <iang@iang.org>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
--===============8137564772681012484==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2b27cc90fc304ee65a563
--001a11c2b27cc90fc304ee65a563
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
But then some people have to move away from mut!
It's also not actually superior. What do you really gain? Hard to archive.
No more transparant to browse. More susceptible to a lot of things.
Ultimately the premise is the same:
Medium = [Subject]
Subject = (String, [Email])
Email = (Headers, String)
The only arguable difference is in catagorization. It's like a single tag
is added to every subject. Usually called the 'category'. People always
miscatagorize and this list is supposed to be pretty much a single category
("cryptography").
If there's really a need for tags we can prepend them to our subject lines.
"[pol]" or "[tech]" are the mayor mayor differences. We can also put intent
into them, but that would require more thought of notation. Stuff like
"publish" or "Request For Comments" or "Discuss" or "news" would be
interesting tags.
In the end the ability of present forums to organize discussion is
dissapointing to the potential. Additionally the workflow of present forums
is far inferior to mailing lists.
Worst of all is reputation systems inherent in forums. Reputation is not
earned through any one objective measure, especially a non personalizable
one. All systems attempt to approximate, and often fail.
To me the answer is: rather not.
Pro:
* Potential for more advanced discussions (metadata)
* Sometimes easier to manage large volumes or content or users (community
management)
* Doesn't distract as much as e-mail (more self-contained)
* More personalizable profiles (username, signature, profile picture,
bio/contact info)
* (Maybe) easier to do psuedononymously
Con:
* Not embedded in standards. (subject to strange change)
* No to very very little archivability (will dissapear, with content, more
easily)
* Does not fit existing workflow that works through e-mail (Less
usual/habitual)
* Far from client native user interface; E-mail sees better support than
"the web", because it's simpler. (Lowered usability)
* Increased hassle will likely decrease users. The forums don't end up in
your inbox, so to speak. E-mail aggregates into your mail-client, forums
are spread thin accross countless pages. (Additional effort, not just a
habitual argument.)
Note that Spam and Espionage are still equally large problems in forum
software.
--001a11c2b27cc90fc304ee65a563
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra">But then some people have to mo=
ve away from mut!<br><br>It's also not actually superior. What do you r=
eally gain? Hard to archive. No more transparant to browse. More susceptibl=
e to a lot of things.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Ultimately =
the premise is the same:<br><br>Medium =3D [Subject]<br>Subject =3D (String=
, [Email])</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Email =3D (Headers, String)</div=
><div class=3D"gmail_extra">
<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">The only arguable difference is in cat=
agorization. It's like a single tag is added to every subject. Usually =
called the 'category'. People always miscatagorize and this list is=
supposed to be pretty much a single category ("cryptography").</=
div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">If there=
9;s really a need for tags we can prepend them to our subject lines. "=
[pol]" or "[tech]" are the mayor mayor differences. We can a=
lso put intent into them, but that would require more thought of notation. =
Stuff like "publish" or "Request For Comments" or "=
;Discuss" or "news" would be interesting tags.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">In the end =
the ability of present forums to organize discussion is dissapointing to th=
e potential. Additionally the workflow of present forums is far inferior to=
mailing lists.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><=
div class=3D"gmail_extra">Worst of all is reputation systems inherent in fo=
rums. Reputation is not earned through any one objective measure, especiall=
y a non personalizable one. All systems attempt to approximate, and often f=
ail.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">To me the a=
nswer is: rather not.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra">Pro:<br>=C2=A0* Potential for more advanced discussions (m=
etadata)</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra">=C2=A0* Sometimes easier to manage large volumes=
or content or users (community management)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"=
>=C2=A0* Doesn't distract as much as e-mail (more self-contained)</div>=
<div class=3D"gmail_extra">
=C2=A0* More personalizable profiles (username, signature, profile picture,=
bio/contact info)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=C2=A0* (Maybe) easier t=
o do psuedononymously</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra">
Con:<br>=C2=A0* Not embedded in standards. (subject to strange change)</div=
><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=C2=A0* No to very very little archivability (w=
ill dissapear, with content, more easily)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=
=C2=A0* Does not fit existing workflow that works through e-mail (Less usua=
l/habitual)</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra">=C2=A0* Far from client native user interface; E=
-mail sees better support than "the web", because it's simple=
r. (Lowered usability)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=C2=A0* Increased ha=
ssle will likely decrease users. The forums don't end up in your inbox,=
so to speak. E-mail aggregates into your mail-client, forums are spread th=
in accross countless pages. (Additional effort, not just a habitual argumen=
t.)</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Note that S=
pam and Espionage are still equally large problems in forum software.</div>=
</div>
--001a11c2b27cc90fc304ee65a563--
--===============8137564772681012484==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
--===============8137564772681012484==--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |