Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board

Good software engineering website

I am working on a software engineering website which is community based. The core of the web site is an advanced Rating and Content management system, that would keep the quality of the threads high while allowing for an open discussion.
I am wondering if anyone have any suggestion?

software eng
Thursday, May 2, 2002

Don't tell /.

Simon Lucy
Thursday, May 2, 2002

check out

Thursday, May 2, 2002

This is the exact idea that inspired the establishment of Slashdot: a good high-quality site with a content rating system to enforce that quality.

I don't know if you've been to Slashdot lately, but their entire paradigm has failed. The quality of the content (other than, perhaps, the headlines) is abysmal. Every post has a rating, but I can rarely see any consistency between ratings.

Since 99 percent of their content is worthless, the rating system tends to just show gradations of that worthlessness, rather than to enforce any standard of quality.

Good luck with putting together your site. If it turns out well, I'll surely visit it. Put a lot of thought into the design of your system, because if it doesn't accomplish what you want it to, it could be difficult to make the changes to a live system.

Benji Smith
Thursday, May 2, 2002

Slashdot hasn't failed.  The headlines are as good as always, and the comments only matter when it's really important to you to wade through garbage to find treasure.  It inevitably happens to any forum, including this.  The solution is to increase the web's ratio of decent forums to users.

The main thing I would advise is that you stick to your principles, while being openminded enough to consider outside ideas which further them.  And this community has to really be something you deep down desire.

If you can do that, I think you'll be successful.  And for the interesting subtle points, get in touch with Rusty at kuro5hin.  He won't know your problemspace, but he does have a strong feel for the subtleties.

slain killer
Thursday, May 2, 2002

An easy way to weed out a lot of the crappier posters is to charge.

Thursday, May 2, 2002

The content management would be really different from other sires.
I am in the process in writing it.
But my question is what other features would make the site better.

Soft eng
Friday, May 3, 2002

Previous post:
site not sires
of not in writing

Soft eng
Friday, May 3, 2002

Where are the other good online forums?

Friday, May 3, 2002

The most effective way to encourage useful, friendly, on-topic discussions is to have pro-active moderators combined with non-anonymous postings.

The moderators are tasked with keeping threads on-topic, deleting posts that flagrantly violate forum rules, and close threads that are against policy are degenerate into flame-wars.

Finally, the site-owners have the power, and duty, to ban members who refuse to abide my the forum rules.

This may sound very anti-slashdot. I suppose it is. I've also seen it work extremely well, creating high quality discussions that are also friendly.

Dave F
Friday, May 3, 2002

I've also heard others make a suggestion that I think is reasonable:

Require every member of the forum to provide an email address (which is validated by the site owners). Then, require forum members to lurk and read posts for 30 days before they are allowed to post their own comments.

It sounds reasonable to me (although I've never participated in--or even seen, for that matter--a forum that operates like this).

Benji Smith
Friday, May 3, 2002

I am reminded of one of the rules Jamie Zawinski laid down when founding the Really-Bad-Attitude list at Netscape:

"After the first few days, as other requests to join came in, I instituted an entrance exam: you could be on RBA only if you first flamed so hard that bile flowed from your eye sockets."

[ ]

Wouldn't it be interesting to establish a forum where your first posts were monitored by the regulars for insight and quality; and continued admission was dependent on majority vote?

Friday, May 3, 2002

The way I am doing right now, and it is an experiment.
The poster categorize her posts and people who respond to these posts are graded by other members.
The members accumulate points in different categories, for example an expert in C doesn't make him an expert in software engineering.
When you grade someone else post, your own total points and your points in that category are weighted in the point you give the other member.

This would only work if the community members are willing to moderate other people.

soft eng
Friday, May 3, 2002

"require forum members to lurk and read posts for 30 days before they are allowed to post their own comments"

Ummm....  You mean _NEW_ forum members, right?

Or do the original (founding) posters have to diligently read
the void for 30 days before they post?

I agree that non-anonymous postings would be very

Friday, May 3, 2002

"I agree that non-anonymous postings would be very
beneficial." - anonymous

Hahahahah!  The irony ...

Friday, May 3, 2002

The more time I spend at open-admission discussion sites, the more I become convinced that the only way to keep the quality of discourse high is to make the site invitation-only, with a ruthless dictator to throw people out if an invitation proves to be a mistake.

Sad, really.

Mike Gunderloy
Friday, May 3, 2002

I suggest that the key to keeping quality postings is to make sure that there is quality
core content.

With this site the core content is Joel. If you are not interested in what he is talking about, or disagree with it too strongly, you will probably leae, whatever the discussion
is like. Hence the posters are going to be
like-minded people - professional Software

David Clayworth
Friday, May 3, 2002

I've noticed that this forum is a good buffer zone for the others. 

Think of a system where you take moderation further -- areas where individuals take it upon themselves to be exclusionary.  That way, there is little of that central heavy-handedness when you nuke posts and de-invite.  I would like seeing two people falling into a thoughtful conversation without being disrupted, occasionally getting an email from an outsider who is then invited to join in.

I hope you don't make it exceedingly difficult to have more than one identity though, at least as far as normal users see.  Otherwise people might fall to a foolish consistency.

Saturday, May 4, 2002

"Wouldn't it be interesting to establish a forum where your first posts were monitored by the regulars for insight and quality; and continued admission was dependent on majority vote?"

Where everybody thinks the same, no one thinks very much.

Joe AA.
Monday, May 6, 2002

I think has some odd content rating systems where the users advance some sort of seniority/ranking system and the seniority of the voters is weighed on asigning an artical a rank.  The site is more of a mass web log than a forum, but I think the system could be applied to a forum.  May be too complex though.

Keith Wright
Monday, May 6, 2002

One of the major disadvantages of requiring a 30-day lurking period is the principle of interest in one's own posts.  I find that I'm much more likely to join in a forum if I've posted one or two entries, because I'll be interested to find out how other people react to my posts.

I agree that core content is an extremely important aspect of fostering a community.  The site needs to have a lot of cud for the forum to chew on, so to speak.

Brent P. Newhall
Monday, May 6, 2002

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home