One of the things that TWiki gets used for is so-called "thread mode" in which some or all of a page is devoted to a conversation or debate about something. Almost all of the
Codev web is thread-mode, for instance.
It occurs to me that, since TWiki has
table formatting rules, a little bit of discipline can produce a very visually structured debate:
Q: Should TWiki use a structured debate "protocol" to visually enhance a (possibly contentious) discussion?
Yes |
No |
Author |
That's an excellent idea. I could go on and on and on and on and on about what a great idea that is. I feel your pain. |
|
BillClinton |
|
No, that's a lousy idea. What BillClinton is not considering is the source! |
KevinKinnell |
This style is a pretty darn good idea |
You can even quailify any doubts succinctly |
MathewBoorman |
Alternatively, that could be
Yes |
Author |
No |
Author |
That's an excellent idea. I could go on and on and on and on and on about what a great idea that is. I feel your pain. |
BillClinton |
No, that's a lousy idea. What BillClinton is not considering is the source! |
KevinKinnell |
That saves space, but you lose immediate context (who wrote first?) But, you can always check the revision history if you want timing information with this style.
Using a table format for visually structuring a debate might serve to do several things:
- You have to take care of the table formatting, which means you probably need to limit a response so that the formatting characters don't get lost in there. The net result is shorter responses.
- A later edit to summarize the discussion would be much easier. More pages could be summarized and the thread-mode page could quietly vanish into obscurity.
- Idomatic differences in language usage would not obscure what side of a question an author agrees with, making it easier to follow the "train of thought".
The technique is flexible, too. There is no reason one couldn't have a third column, for the
wimps moderates.
--
KevinKinnell - 23 May 2000