Discourse has two main ways to organize threads: Categories and Tags.
Categories can be thought of as being tree-based, and tags as being graph-based. What this means is categories are more rigidly structured in a hierarchy, a thread can only exist in one category at a time like how a leaf can only exist on one branch at a time. Tags are far more flexible, a thread can have any number of tags simultaneously.
Based on how categories work on here, it would make the most sense to have our categories be mutually exclusive. Meaning that it would only make logical sense to put a thread into one category. Right now our category system isn’t mutually exclusive. It would totally make sense for a thread about #systems-changes to also be related/relevant to #systems-thinking .
So my proposal is that we only allow 3 categories based on the “type” of thread you are creating and then all other thread organizing is done using Discourse’s wonderful tagging system.
The 3 types are:
- Forum post - the typical type of conversational thread, where everyone in invited to participate equally. The first post in the thread is just the conversation starter.
- Wiki post - a special type of discourse thread where everyone is able to edit the first post as if it were a wiki page, and the rest of the thread is used to discuss that wiki page.
- Blog post - This would be the typical type of thread, but the difference between #1 above is that the first post of the thread is intended to act more like a blog post of the person who authored it. The author might even choose to repost/syndicate from their personal blog that they host elsewhere. The rest of the thread then effectively acts like the comment section of a blog post. The difference between #1 and #3 is subtle, the first post in a blog thread will more likely be longer-form and/or contain things like images, while the forum post might just be a sentence or two to instigate a conversation with others. Also, the blog-type is also far more likely to centre around the original author, for example providing them feedback, than it is to have the topic of discussion at the centre.
- Q&A Post (optional/considering) - Discourse also has a plugin for doing question and answer style threads where the first post is the question, and the rest of the posts are attempts to answer that question. All users are allowed to vote on the best answer, 1 vote per user, and the thread is then rearranged to put the answer with the most votes at the top.
Does this make sense? Would you choose different names for the categories? Do you agree with my proposal? I’d like to get some feedback from others like @daviding , @akeala , @sophia_aletheia before making this change. If I don’t get any feedback I’ll likely just move forward and convert all current categories into tags and create the new categories listed above… as this feels like a safe enough decision to just act on given it can always be undone later pretty easily.
As I said above, Discourse’s tagging system is pretty amazing. There are tag groups (with nested parent/child hierarchies), tag synonyms. You can restrict certain tags to certain categories, you can mention tags on the fly once they have been created once to describe a thread (for example #technology ). Clicking on tags searches the whole forum for that tag. I’m pretty sure you can get web feeds for tags too
I just stomped to think what style of thread would this one be… I guess I would just add it to the forum category, and maybe tag it #meta or #site-feedback (Also noticing from creating this post that you mention both categories and threads in a post using # so I’m curious if you can have a category with the same name as a tag) BUT! This post does sort of seem like a special kind of post of its own… more like a proposal in a Loomio poll. Which reminds me, I haven’t given Loomio a try in quite a while and I know they have a new set of expanded “poll” types.
Maybe we need a stream-of-consciousness type! (Or that can just be a blog I guess)