42 replies to this topic

[lightowl]

Intro.

I am beginning to take the first steps to creating a new Active Topics section. This will be a single page that provides a portal into the ImmInst forums and community from various perspectives. The goal is to make it easier to follow discussions and meetings that are of personal interest to members.


Justification.

If you are a frequent visitor of the Active Topics page you will probably have noticed that it is a mess of various topics that are distinctly different in nature. Most of the topics are related to health and food supplementation. This is to be expected, since most people here have an interest in keeping personal health optimal. For some though, this is only a short term goal. Many are interested in the long term progress of life extension efforts and the mission of ImmInst and would like to be able to focus on these efforts effectively, without having to sort through topics that are largely irrelevant to those goals. It has been suggested that the institute split the forum into multiple instances. This project would largely attain that goal. In addition it would provide a method for people to individually tailor what information they are presented with. This would provide for a much more dynamic structure of conversation. One based on the actual needs of the members and users alike.

It is important to note that this will not be a replacement for any current navigation. It will be a supplement to the current setup. One that can be used optionally. Eventually it may evolve into something that could replace the current Active Topics page because it would provide for the same basic functionality.

In addition to providing for better navigation of the forums, this "Portal" could be customizable by Directors, Navigators and Members (DNM) to enhance membership participation. For example, it would be possible to implement a real time chat that would always be available when viewing the forums. Also, DNM could highlight specific topics, blog entries or articles in general, that would be of interest to specific segments of members. There are an endless stream of possibilities just waiting to be implemented. I am willing to do a lot of the footwork on this. The only thing that is required from the community is an open mind and a willingness to supply ideas.


Working points.

1) Will be an addition to ImmInst and not a replacement of current navigation options.
2) Will provide for advanced personal customization.
3) Will provide for multiple default settings.
4) Will provide for updates of blogs, meetings, topics, chats, etc...

These are currently the main goals. If you feel other goals are important to this project, please let it be known.


Preliminary features.

1) Show Tracked Topics.
2) Show Tracked Forums.
3) Hide Ignored Topics.
4) Hide Ignored Forums.
5) Show list of [number] most active topics past [period].
6) Show list of [number] most read topics past [period].
7) Show list of past [number] most viewed threads.
8) Show list of past [number] most participated in threads.
9) Members/Navigators selection of current important topics.
10) Important announcements.
11) Chat.
12) List of events.
13) List new Private Messages
14) List Private Messages that have not been marked as "Replied To".

Please suggest any features you would like to have in addition to this list. This is a preliminary list and will be expanded and revised as we go along.


Default settings.

This is a preliminary list of default settings that could be implemented. This is basically a tracking of the various Main Forum categories.

1) Community + Free Speech
2) Health & Nutrition
3) Science & Technology
4) Society & Philosophy


Help requested.

1) Interface design. ( Mock-ups )
2) Programming. ( PHP )
3) Design of schematics. ( MySQL )
4) Technical knowledge ( IPB )

If anyone is interested in helping out it would be appreciated. If you have any skills or knowledge that could be useful, please don't hesitate to post them here.


Previous discussions.

Here are a few discussions relating to this project. I am certain there are more information within various off topic threads. It would be great if you could post a link to it here if you stumble across it.

Active Topics Section 2, here, radical life extension topics

Poll, active topics sub forums, supplements and radical life extension?

STOP using the ACTIVE TOPICS button, its a con, its a trap!

Seperating nootropic and supplement stuff, two "active topics" sections?

Edited by lightowl, 01 December 2008 - 06:19 AM.

[brokenportal]

These defaults and customability seems like a great idea. At first I thought that anything to complex would be a bad idea, but this seems like it would work. I cant wait to see how it works. Thanks for putting in the time on this. It should pay you back about a good billion fold. I suspect, as Im sure many do, that this will cause imminst to gradually gain in activity until there are probably 100 active members on line at any given time. I bet it would reach a point similar to that in about 6 months. Just throwing that out there, any predictions?

[lightowl]

At first I thought that anything to complex would be a bad idea, but this seems like it would work.

Complexity is definitely an issues that needs to be considered carefully as we go along. It should not be required for users to change anything on the page for it to be of some value to everybody. At the same time it should be possible to adjust things to cater to specific needs. This is a classic problem in software development.

I suspect, as Im sure many do, that this will cause imminst to gradually gain in activity until there are probably 100 active members on line at any given time. I bet it would reach a point similar to that in about 6 months. Just throwing that out there, any predictions?

Im not sure its possible to make such a prediction with any meaningful accuracy. The primary goal should be to make the community function better for those who are already involved. Eventually that should also bring in more people.


Perhaps we could feature some of the other forums in this portal. The MF Forums and sci.life-extension@googlegroups.com comes to mind. Are there other potential forums/communities we might want to tap into? H+, betterhumans, etc?

Edited by lightowl, 30 November 2008 - 08:27 AM.

[lightowl]

Here is another way we could split the forums:

1) Life extension ( Science, Technology, Activism )
2) Transhumanism ( Science, Technology, Philosophy. )
3) Health ( Supplements, Fitness, etc )

It could also go the other way around.

1) Activism ( Life extension, Transhumanism )
2) Science ( Life extension, Transhumanism )
3) Philosophy ( Life extension, Transhumanism )

Just throwing up some ideas. There could also be more than 3 categories. Ultimately we would have to tie those categories to specific forums, but each category could also contain some of the same forums.

It could also be as few as 2 categories.

1) Life extension
2) Supplements

I think these default settings will be the issue of most controversy. Those are the options visitor will have per default. Unregistered visitors will only be able to make temporary changes to their settings. ( cookie identification ).

Edited by lightowl, 30 November 2008 - 03:20 PM.

[Lazarus Long]

Here is another way we could split the forums:

1) Life extension ( Science, Technology, Activism )
2) Transhumanism ( Science, Technology, Philosophy. )
3) Health ( Supplements, Fitness, etc )

It could also go the other way around.

1) Activism ( Life extension, Transhumanism )
2) Science ( Life extension, Transhumanism )
3) Philosophy ( Life extension, Transhumanism )

Just throwing up some ideas. There could also be more than 3 categories. Ultimately we would have to tie those categories to specific forums, but each category could also contain some of the same forums.

This is too redundant IMHO while not addressing the primary issue of how to preserve an area of active topics that is focused on the science. the philosophy of it can easily survive the multiple manifestations it would have as social science. It also is really necessary to split off the focus on supps and noots if there is to be any attention to pure science at all because of how much traffic occurs for that focus and how it buries everything else.

It could also be as few as 2 categories.

1) Life extension
2) Supplements

I think these default settings will be the issue of most controversy. Those are the options visitor will have per default. Unregistered visitors will only be able to make temporary changes to their settings. ( cookie identification ).

I definitely think there is a need for more than two categories as I have already suggested. I guess I still favor the four fold approach, with perhaps an option for an all of the above in the drop down filters.

BTW, great job Lightowl!

[lightowl]

I guess I still favor the four fold approach, with perhaps an option for an all of the above in the drop down filters.

Yeah, there will be plenty of options. Dont worry.

One method we could use to evaluate the split is by identifying the top X forums. Then make a category for each of those, and let the rest of the forums be included in all those categories.

I did a quick command to list the top 15 forums by number of topics with new posts in November. Not surprisingly Supplements and Nootropics are clear leaders. Disregarding the "2008 US Presidential Elections", "Immortality Institute" is a distant 2nd to Health related forums.

132 Supplements
114 Nootropics
100 2008 US Presidential Elections
64 Can #
40 Lifestyle
36 Immortality Institute
35 Resveratrol
32 Bioscience
29 Skin Health
26 Politics & Law
25 Nutrition
22 Longevity Meme Folding@Home
19 Multi-Media
17 Philosophy & Immortalism
16 Research & Suppliers

Here is a quick grouping that might be effective.

132 Supplements
114 Nootropics
16 Research & Suppliers
40 Lifestyle
35 Resveratrol
29 Skin Health
25 Nutrition

36 Immortality Institute
32 Bioscience
22 Longevity Meme Folding@Home
19 Multi-Media
17 Philosophy & Immortalism
26 Politics & Law

Its really a sad sight from an Activists perspective.

Edited by lightowl, 01 December 2008 - 03:01 AM.

[brokenportal]

With imminsts current level of activity I cant see how anything more than 2 active topics options would be a good idea. I wavor back and forth between being convinced that the splits you, light owl, list will work or not. I used to run an msn group at http://groups.msn.co...ngandphilosophy over the years it has been hacked and messed up but years ago I split the general forum to try to gain more active topics. It worked, so I split it into three and four. That didnt work though.

If there were 4 buttons as Lazarus Long suggests, people would feel burdened to have to click through each one in order to skim through in search of active topics they find interesting. Even two is to much. Really we should split the forums and call supplements one .com name and the radical another. Two though should work.

In the future when the forums are really bustling then a good 4 way split might be a good option, but I cant see how it would be now.

[lightowl]

If there were 4 buttons as Lazarus Long suggests, people would feel burdened to have to click through each one in order to skim through in search of active topics they find interesting.

This would be mitigated by users having the option to add forums to their favorite category page. That would require them to sign up though, if they want their settings to be permanent/transferable.

[brokenportal]

That would be a lot like the selective button wouldnt it?

[lightowl]

That would be a lot like the selective button wouldnt it?

Yes, that would be much the same.

[brokenportal]

I see, well then in that case, the selective button, as discussed in other places, is good in theory, but nobody uses it.

If it were set up like that, then we would have to actively inform everybody about it, direct them to it and tell them about it. Even then, even if its implentation were super simple, many, maybe even nearly all of the members would click out of it because it seemed to complex.

Like you said, go ahead with what you think will work, Im just saying, and of course I could be wrong.

[lightowl]

I see, well then in that case, the selective button, as discussed in other places, is good in theory, but nobody uses it.

Its a very poor implementation (also, its not working in MSIE, thats 90% of users). I think we can come up with something much better. In any case, the defaults will do wonders for focus.

Edited by lightowl, 01 December 2008 - 06:35 AM.

[Lazarus Long]

Lightowl's point is that how the selective button is configured now essentially *sucks*. It is not obvious, user friendly or perhaps most importantly, it does not remember its settings. If it were an obvious personally configured active topics button then it would be a valuable perk to the members we could promote as another reason to pay for added access.

The selective button as it is right now is a drop down menu that must be used every time it is desired. An extra programmable Active topics button would rapidly become the default for many members. If we have a personalizable button for members it is all good but I still think we need to split the social and hard sciences as well as both from supps and noots but one additional alternative option is to make the select button use "all of the below" setting as the first default by just clicking it without applying the drop down filter.

Newbies need to be able to find the substance in this place without being overwhelmed by the fluff and passions for politics, spirituality and other distracting elements. Going to the Active Topics page as it is configured now makes us appear even more of a radical fringe group rather than legitimate science organization.

Having four primary buttons for newbies makes it far easier for them to navigate the site as a whole and that is what we need to be thinking about not just the utility to those of us extremely familiar with Imminst.

[Lazarus Long]

BTW I have now tested the forum software in Google's Chrome as well as Safari, Firefox and IE8.

Did anyone else notice that Fast Reply doesn't appear in Chrome?

However it is inconsistent because it appears in some forum areas and not others.

[brokenportal]

Lightowl's point is that how the selective button is configured now essentially *sucks*. It is not obvious, user friendly or perhaps most importantly, it does not remember its settings. If it were an obvious personally configured active topics button then it would be a valuable perk to the members we could promote as another reason to pay for added access.

The selective button as it is right now is a drop down menu that must be used every time it is desired. An extra programmable Active topics button would rapidly become the default for many members. If we have a personalizable button for members it is all good but I still think we need to split the social and hard sciences as well as both from supps and noots but one additional alternative option is to make the select button use "all of the below" setting as the first default by just clicking it without applying the drop down filter.

Newbies need to be able to find the substance in this place without being overwhelmed by the fluff and passions for politics, spirituality and other distracting elements. Going to the Active Topics page as it is configured now makes us appear even more of a radical fringe group rather than legitimate science organization.

Having four primary buttons for newbies makes it far easier for them to navigate the site as a whole and that is what we need to be thinking about not just the utility to those of us extremely familiar with Imminst.

I see, I guess your right that there are things that can make this "selective" function stand out more. The defaults and the "memory" will be great, and if it is put in a bigger more noticable, or prompted button then it should work great. As for four making it easier than two for new people, and two making it easier for only people familiar with imminst, I would still have to disagree.

Newbies will want to see all the different forums, right, but they can do that from the forums button. Having four buttons I think would make them tend to only click on 1 or 2 of them when they have the time. This would leave them with the feeling that they are missing out on the big picture of the action going on in imminst.

Everybody would go to two though, I beleive. I tried it in an active msn group I used to run and it worked. I tried 3 and 4 too, and that didnt work. It slowed them all down and members adopted one of them as their main active topics button. I suspect the same would happen here but I could be wrong.

[AgeVivo]

Suggestion: keep the current "Active Topics" section but sort it by relevance first:
- put the tracked messages first (look-back duration specified when we decide to track a message)
- put the sections in our order of preference (eg longevity-science then supplements)
- in the case of several new messages in a thread, put only the last one (i think it is already the case)

That way:
- it is organized, personalized, and we don't have to click on several "Active Topics"
- we keep discussions on what we like and where we can be helpful
- we may still find interesting messages that do not belong to our prefered categories

Edited by AgeVivo, 01 December 2008 - 08:58 PM.

[lightowl]

AgeVivo, these are good suggestions. Let me expand on that.

Suggestion: keep the current "Active Topics" section but sort it by relevance first:

The reason for creating a new page is to detach from the forum installation so changes does not effect the forum directly. Also, it effectively makes any objections to change largely irrelevant, since no changes will be made.

- put the tracked messages first (look-back duration specified when we decide to track a message)

I like this idea of having one list sorted by relevance. One potential problem though could be: if someone tracks many topics, they might push new topics away, but merging the lists should definitely be an option for those who want it that way. The list could also automatically sort out topics that are already read by the individual since last post.

- put the sections in our order of preference (eg longevity-science then supplements)

Great idea to prioritize forums on a personal level. Perhaps this should also be done by default. This feature should also be opt in/out IMO because it would push new topics below already visited topics, but that is a different can of worms. Something we should sort out as we get some user feedback.

- in the case of several new messages in a thread, put only the last one (i think it is already the case)

Yes, this is default, and I intend to retain that. It could also be optional to show a line for each new message in the active topics lists.

That way:
- it is organized, personalized, and we don't have to click on several "Active Topics"

It should never be necessary to click on multiple active topic sections. Each user should be able to customize their favorite category. That is the plan.

- we keep discussions on what we like and where we can be helpful

This is the function of tracking topics. The presentation is where the details come into play.

- we may still find interesting messages that do not belong to our preferred categories

It would be possible to add forums to ones preferred category. That way no-one should have to click on multiple categories. The point of a split is to provide default categories for various focuses. How each individual customizes those categories should be entirely their discretion.

Edited by lightowl, 04 December 2008 - 03:09 AM.

[Lazarus Long]

Just as a point of reference I almost never track threads, I get too much stuff in five different email boxes now to want to add more to track and that is not counting that my email bounce for stuff from the institute has never worked.

I track through my plain old fashioned wetware memory and search functions or by what is current.

Also new arrivals are not going to be tracking by default. They are going to go to the top of the active topics and look at what is happening and that means that many important subjects get buried by default. That is why I think some areas need to be automatically isolated so they are not locked in a competition for being in the active area. Let's face it science is not the most popular subject for many users unless they are very serious about it and nevertheless hard science IS the most important area of information we share here.

At the very least we need to break the sciences off into their own area and Imminst specific organizational stuff into its own area. I would rather not see science mixed with politics in an active list at all but social science could stay with Institute related topics but all of these should not have to compete with Supps and noots for the attention of a person that just entered through the portal for the first time.

[brokenportal]

Oh you mean that tracking topics is through email? Oh man, I will never use that, and I doubt most people will. I thought it meant like a seperate list you click on in imminst that shows your tracked topics or something like that.

As for the hard sciences, Ide like to see that pick up too. Mind was talking about starting a page listing all the MFURI research volunteers. There should be a way to stimulate the science section by working those ideas together. A ton more MFURI volunteers working in Imminst would be great for balancing out our mission statement. If anybody wants to help attract more students then sign up as an MFURI marketing recruit at This Link.

We contact biology clubs and science undergraduates student affairs offices and sell MFURI to them. If more of us sign up through that then we can meet to recruit together in the MFURI meetings. A couple of minds working together on selling the idea could really make some progress. Five of us working in there could probably draw in a good 5 interested students per week. If 1 of them signs up then thats about 50 new undergrad researchers per year, that are priming themselves to become full blown sens researchers later down the road. Theres a mega ton of potential there. Dont pass up this opportunity to fend off the reaper if you dont have to.

[Lazarus Long]

We have already lost more than a few serious scientists and science grad students BECAUSE they couldn't get a word in edgewise over the hyperbole and they have said they do not want to be associated with sites that threaten their reputations because of some of the *kookier* posters.

They will also roll their eyes and go look somewhere else if the science is getting mixed with religious issues. There are thousands if not millions of sites for the religious minded but only a scant few that allow lay folk to learn about science at the cutting edge in a participatory manner. Our mission is to be one of the latter while preserving some space for the ethical and social debates to continue on a more disciplined plane. Spirituality is a social reality that deserves a place at the table of topics here but it, along with lifestyle concerns, society, and politics should not be allowed to drown out the serious discussion of the sciences, or for that matter internal issues of projects, member topics and member social development through intros, news sharing etc.

All I am saying is that if we could filter the areas apart some then we could better meet the needs of both our diverse members AND better stay on task with the core mission. Serious students of science and professionals will simply leave for other sites if they are going to have fundamentalist interfere with a scientific discussion on say genetics or stem cells by debating with ethical and political arguments that belong in a different category.

That unfair competition for preeminence is effectively what happens by default when all the topics are forced to compete to be at the top of the same active topics page. Newbies cannot understand the nuances and intricacies of navigating forum areas around here and they shouldn't be expected to, we need to make the initial navigation experience more user friendly and that is why we need to split the active topics into *zones*. I still think four such *zones* are better but I could live with 3 if I had to.

And yes my understanding is that when you track a topic an email is sent to you whenever someone posts to the topic. Though your idea of making a separate tracking function that creates a special list of tracked topics is probably possible too and would be useful if it can be done.

[Lazarus Long]

How about this; instead of calling the four buttons active topics, call them active zones and divide them up by the categorization we have already discussed. This could be either a drop down under a single active topics button into four zone choices or four distinct buttons arrayed next to one another labeled with general overview ideas like Sciences, Lifestyle, Institute and Social zones.

Remember we still have the individual forum indexes and the general forum index too. Both of those will also describe a more selective form of active topic list by default whenever they are used.

[lightowl]

And yes my understanding is that when you track a topic an email is sent to you whenever someone posts to the topic. Though your idea of making a separate tracking function that creates a special list of tracked topics is probably possible too and would be useful if it can be done.

Getting email alerts is a sub-feature of the topic tracking feature. I envision a separate list (on the same page) or a merge of active topics and tracked topics.

or four distinct buttons arrayed next to one another labeled with general overview ideas like Sciences, Lifestyle, Institute and Social zones.

I think this would be the best way to do it. Drop-down menus are not very user friendly.

How about this; instead of calling the four buttons active topics, call them active zones and divide them up by the categorization we have already discussed.

Yes, "Zones" would be a good name. I have been calling it categories but "zones" is better.

Just to define it. A Zone is primarily a collection of Active Topics from specified forums. In addition a Zone could consist of highlighted topics, blogs, articles and/or links from various sources. Also a Zone will be customisable to every individuals needs, but is defined by some default settings that are decided by the community.

Is that about right?

[lightowl]

Help.... I would like to be able to edit the Project outline in the first post of this thread at any time. Would it be possible to allow me to do that?

[brokenportal]

I agree with all these topic splitting sentiments. You say 4, some of us say 2, but I could settle on three. I dont know about everybody else.

A scientist section should be accessable by application only. That would work wouldnt it? We could all read it, but only MFURI students and advisors and other scientists we know could participate in the discussions of that forum.

A lot of exposure expedition minded people are being scared away all the time too. I have talked to many many people that say they dont post at imminst any more because concepts continuously get buried in non radical related issues. I dont think thats anybodies fault of course, its just something that needs to be fixed functionaly.


About zones, Im liking the visualization of that. Im wondering, are you keeping the current active topics option too? That might work great. 4 zones, and then the active topics button for those that dont want to cruise the zones and or have time to cruise the zones.

[lightowl]

Another way to track/highlight topics could be by automatically evaluating a users interest in a specific topic by counting recent visits and participation in that topic. The system could then propose tracking of the topic or give an indication of unread posts in a relevance list. The ignore topic feature would allow for later designating a previously interesting topic irrelevant for the user.

A completely different way of highlighting potentially interesting topics for users: A user could designate people of interest. When those people participate in a thread or are actively following a thread, that thread could me marked as interesting to the user. This is a slightly more advanced feature but it could be automated by intelligently evaluating a users behaviour compared to participation of other users. For example: if I often read topics created by brokenportal, then the system could notice this behavior and let me know when brokenportal creates a new topic. This could be done across Zones, so if brokenportal creates a topic in a Zone I don't visit, I could still be made aware of it.

[lightowl]

for those that dont want to cruise the zones and or have time to cruise the zones.

Just to clarify. The primary function of having multiple zones is to allow for visitors/members to select a zone of interest and then essentially ignore the rest. If they find something interesting from another zone, they would be able to add that forum/topic to the zone they follow.

[Lazarus Long]

Help.... I would like to be able to edit the Project outline in the first post of this thread at any time. Would it be possible to allow me to do that?

I am going to bed now but if you post your entire edit as a new post I can replace the first post for you tomorrow when I check in if another of the navs can't do it for you sooner. After I replace the first post I will delete the one you provide to replace it.

[Lazarus Long]

for those that dont want to cruise the zones and or have time to cruise the zones.

Just to clarify. The primary function of having multiple zones is to allow for visitors/members to select a zone of interest and then essentially ignore the rest. If they find something interesting from another zone, they would be able to add that forum/topic to the zone they follow.

Yes that is the optimal program but the programmable option is for dues paying members, registered users and visitors just get the defaults. There should be some perks for those that are contributing IMHO.

[Lazarus Long]

I agree with all these topic splitting sentiments. You say 4, some of us say 2, but I could settle on three. I dont know about everybody else.

A scientist section should be accessable by application only. That would work wouldnt it? We could all read it, but only MFURI students and advisors and other scientists we know could participate in the discussions of that forum.

Posting privileges would be by approval from a peer review approach but also open to any paying member subject to peer review if they violate the somewhat stricter posting guidelines, however everyone should be able to read it. Also a member that got restricted from posting in the science zone would not necessarily lose all posting privileges, unless they violated the bylaws. But this is an area where registered users might be allowed to post too on an individual basis.

For example Jay Olshansky is a registered user and a scientist. He would be granted permission to post in the science area and would not have to be a paying member to do so.

The members only area can also have a science round table area that included perhaps a file sharing aspect for advanced journal articles, not subject to general public viewing.

A lot of exposure expedition minded people are being scared away all the time too. I have talked to many many people that say they dont post at imminst any more because concepts continuously get buried in non radical related issues. I dont think thats anybodies fault of course, its just something that needs to be fixed functionaly.

I am not exactly sure what you mean by "exposure expedition minded people" but the whole point of this exercise is to reduce the amount to which one category buries another and in that respect we are all on the same page. We only differ on nuance.

About zones, Im liking the visualization of that. Im wondering, are you keeping the current active topics option too? That might work great. 4 zones, and then the active topics button for those that dont want to cruise the zones and or have time to cruise the zones.

This was the all of the above option I mentioned earlier but it might be an accessible default inside the top of any active zone page since the button describing that zone would no longer be needed. First go to a specific zone of interest but you can always jump back to all of the above once there.

[lightowl]

For example Jay Olshansky is a registered user and a scientist. He would be granted permission to post in the science area and would not have to be a paying member to do so.

I just want to make it clear that posting privileges are out of the scope of this project. Any posting privileges must be set on a forum basis, so if a zone is to be restricted to posting from specific members, it must consist only of forums that are governed by those special restrictions. The Forum Portal will not be able to technically intervene in the functions of the general forum.

It would however be possible to change permissions on forums depending on zone designation in the portal, but that would have to be done with special attention so as not to disrupt normal forum operations.