"Unknown W. Brackets" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I've definitely used threaded conversation in the past. In fact, I > used to think it was much better than linear, quite so. But, then I > used linear for quite some time and realized something simple: threaded > is just a pain, and only barely better. > When saying that, though, are you considering scale? A quick-n-dirty answer to "what is 2 + 2?" and the reply post "4", sure. What about a thread like the one we are posting in now? At a shallow level, web forum, or anything for that matter, is adequate, because it's all just throw-away, non-substantive content in a place where "community" is the key thing. That's hard to argue against when the major sites have loads of people behind them making money. All they need are the masses and they're golden (aka, raking in the dough), be it "I should get paid the same amount for running this .org as a CEO at a similar size company gets". OK, so I seem to be "in a mood" tonight. Let's continue down the path of the preceding paragraph just one more step. Web forums shove that TOS in your face pronto. What if I want to see the "articles of incorporation" and financial statements of the site? What if I want to know by name who is getting money and from where? What if I ask the site owners, on behalf of some major content "contributors" to forum to remove all content provided by those contributors because they feel they have been taken advantage of, or whatever reason? Would they remove the contributors content? Web forums: I cozy little scam? I sure wouldn't want to be named on those articles of incorporation, or whatever, when the sheeple start turning to wolves and want their worth back. No no. Wouldn't wanna be, for sure. </soapbox> (At least until I read another post in this thread. This thread is quite a source for things to respond to or expound on or make for "food for thought".) Abe
