Discussion tags / keywords

I see the potential and usability in a feature like this.

Would it make sense, if there was a 'parent' tag for the conversation. This parent tag could consist of the same options as the categories for defining a Loomio group (ranging from Arts, Economics, Uncategorized, etc in the category dropdown menu, when you want to make your own group).

After defining this parent tag, the user would be able to define their own tag (e.g. they chose the parent tag "Arts" + their own "Leonardo Da Vinci"). This way, there wouldn't be a mess with a gazillion different "parent" tags, but at the same time the ones that they can chose from would describe enough different fields of interest. Their own extra tag would bring the added value, but it woulld already be placed in the right context.

I love this idea. I'd also love to figure out whether tagging comments could work.

It is on our roadmap: https://trello.com/c/vqVDjxZ7/69-tagging-users-groups-discussions

using a wiki-like notation for tagging [keywords], both in the core discussion and comments, migth be an easy way. One would then simply need to educate users to not use too much of these tags (or opt. restrict to 3-5 tags in each post?) to keep the focus accurate.

queries on tags combination (and exclusion) might be a nice addition if the volume increases.

I posted this in another discussion. Seems relevant here as well. It demonstrates another way of using tags to visually map divergence/convergence in discussions.

Don't think there is a way to link to another post in Loomio so will try to copy/paste it here in full.

Not trying to spampost. Just interested in other opinions on the software below.

RT: .....Re mapping the visual grammar of divergent online discussions. Just wanted to bring the following site to your attention.

It seems to do a pretty good job at melding mindmap, content management, and conversational divergence. Behaves almost like a visual tiddlywiki. (One of my favourite tools for many years)

Debategraph, is an Australian software project, seems free & open, designed for political discussions etc (co-founder, Peter Baldwin, is past Aus Federal MP & Cabinet Minister).

Do persist in exploring past the first page. The onboarding experience isn't that great. But if you start to play with the options, especially views, it has very diverse & comprehensive functionality. (Box views, show all works best for me)

Break out the sidebar into page view to better see content. Has lots of great functionalities but you have to dig and play a bit to discover them.

Again, not a great initial UX. Action links/buttons are often almost hidden in smallest text & obscure locations. Persist in playful exploration. There is a lot hidden in the fine details. (eg. Message flows are under the 'Stream' tab)

It's been around for a few years so a bit surprised it is not more well known. Seems to be still alive and in use but not overly active. Haven't quite worked out its 'business model' yet? Seems very user friendly. For example you can replace the site branding with your own, complete with URL redirection to your home page etc.

Site probably needs a little updating. Looks a little 'grandmotherly' with its pastel colour schemes etc. Morphing it with the proposal driven capability of Loomio would be very interesting.

Debategraph

Try looking at an active discussion to get a better feel.

You might like

An Open Source Pattern Language (re)generative of Commons

Or

Civilization Project

@Gray I gave you just a like but your perspective is great. In fact, I raised thie idea in this discussion after looking at the tens of pages of conversations which are not active anymore and thinking that they must be linked somehow. Having the discussion tags-keywords available, would make all the inactive discussions alive again, if the tag they have is popular at a certain point in time. And by linking the discussions hopefully they would enable to create a more interesting structure for people: stories instead of independent discussions.

Implementing an add-on similar to debategraph is easier to be done using the discussion tags and timelines. Discussion tags will not just improve usability and interactivity but has a transformational potential when discussions get linked toghether. That's why I think tags at discussion level are very important; more important than tags for users or comments.

I strongly favor tag based archival organization over hierarchical categorization. I think it's important however for a group to have some collective recourse for the potentially misleading (and very messy) misuse of tags. This subject can lead to really meaty discussion.

Hey @zack Good to see you are still kicking around in Wellington.

The concept is about creating knowledge catchment areas. Past dialogue becomes an aggregated data resource to inform future conversations. Creating relational links enables better access to that repository of knowledge, detailing pathways and journey maps.

Visualisation of argument mapping is a powerful enabler of creating these catchments.

The Debategraph site has been around for awhile. Though being actively used, it doesn't appear to have had much dev love for some time.

So the data custodians may be open to synergistic discussions with Loomio. Appears to be a powerful partnering opportunity between the two software approaches. Also like that groups can personally IP brand the pages they create on Debategraph.

Possibliites??

@Gray As for past conversations informing future dialog, I've previously suggested Loomio add "Statements of fact" which someone else suggest be renamed "Agreements". These would be the foundation or building blocks of future conversations.

Loomio's ability to help gauge consensus could be used to help build blocks of text a community agrees upon giving a basis for future conversations.

Hey that's an interesting thought, @BenBurton Being a visual thinker, I get a picture of foundation stones inscribed with statements. With clickable links back to the original conversations. (Perhaps also 'graffitied' with the handle of those who participated at the time.) Visual posterity

Thanks Ben

#offtopic
@Gray Just dropping a note that the Loomio team has a small contract to collaborates with and test debate graphing apps Assembl and Litemap. You'll be hearing more soon!