mixing/engineering/production sub forum ?

[paul e.]

is anyone into the idea of a 'mixing/engineering/production' type forum category ?

[elektro80]

That makes sense. Smart suggestion. That might in fact generate more discussion and posts and we like that a lot. We better check with Howard.

[seraph]

if we keep adding sub-forums we'll need a "yellow pages" forum to find the other ones

[Kassen]

Word, Seraph, it´s getting a bit much. However Paul does have a valid point too; production is a bit of a black hole here. Perhaps we need to restructure?

[mosc]

I think it is a good idea myself.

I'm moving this from schmooze to electro-music.com.

Maybe we do have too many forums. I'm thinking it is an advantage though. I'm not sure how many people use the index page vs. View Last Posts or something.

I'm curious. How do some of the newer memebers feel? Do we have too many sub-forums?

[Kassen]

Yes, those are very good questions too, Mosc.

I think the way it´s split up currently implies rules that aren´t there. For example the "instruments" section is split up into some specific synthesisers but that will lead a new user who wants to discuss Formant modulars or, erm, cheap Casio samplers confused on wether or not that apropriate. What realy confuses me is the section in "schmooze" on "New England" with it´s one topic. Is New England, pleasant as it without a doubt is, realy in need of it´s own forum more then, say, Melbourne or Brazilia or Geerkesklooster are?

It´s not so much the litteral amount of sub-fora that disturbs me, it´s the lack of a clear hyrachical structure. I could -for example- see a top level structure made of "production, "composition", "instruments" and "social", then split those further. That keeps the matter of the unequal distribution of topics (and indeed attention) implying some things are less suitable then other. Of cource some topics realy *are* less then suitable, but I can think of many things we could discuss and for which the current structure isn´t realy inviting.

Basically; I have no clear cut sollutions but would like to warn against throwing new fora against every question. Production needs it´s own section, though.

[mosc]

Good points, Kassen. Thanks...

[mosc]

[Kassen]

I have to admit that I didn´t look at it that way untill Herr Smackos brought it to my attention. I just typed it down and added the Casio example because I like cheap samplers.
:¬)

Sorting is a hard problem, I don´t envy you, standing at the sidelines, blurting out "X is better then Y" is much easier then your job, and that´s even before anybody sugests there might be compositional side effects of design choices in the G2, or worse yet; a movement that wants to promote the social aspects of engineering and production!

;¬)

[blue hell]

[mosc]

Ths linking works pretty well. When an editor move a topic from one forum to another, they can choose to leave a link in the original forum.

Sometimes reorganizing can be a bit of a chore. We originally had just one News forum. Then we decided to split it up into several subforums. Creating the new forums was easy, but then we had to go in and decide where to move each topic. There were hundreds of them. Elektro80 and I went on a topic moving binge. It took over an hour.

[Kassen]

Ok, so, we axe a few rarely used sub-forums like "new england" and "memory lane", we categorise the rest and place more emphasis on interconnecting from now on?

About interconecting; I don´t realy like the idea of needing to move topics to make links. In fact I don´t like moving topics all, I always think it makes people feel unwelcome to move their "news about movies" from "news" to "movies". Bad example, perhaps. Anyway, perhaps Editors could make links to posts in threads elsewehre like "look what Bruce says here about turntables, wouldn´t that be a interesting aproach to G2 sequencers?"

[Kassen]

Also; there, erm, welllllllll............

There is no board on synthesis.

*ducks*

There are lots and lots of sections on synthesisers and I suppose some sides of sound design could be adopted by my little corner or from a different perspective in this new "production" section, but synthesis....

Concentrating on aprocaching synthesis from the side of hardware instead of the other way around could be perfectly valid, but is that realy what we do and what we want to "promote"?

Why am I suddenly reminded of the time I gave up on styles and moods and instead sorted my cd´s on alphabet?

[mosc]

Kassen, you are right about moving topics, but sometimes it's necessary else the forums become meaningless. We don't always do linking by moving. Often we add our own posts that say, see this topic because it's related or intersting. But when someone posts an announcement about his concert in the Nord Modular discussion, then I think it's appropriate to move it to News, Concerts, and leave a link back in the Nord Modular forum for his NM buddies.

As for recategorizing the higest level, that's not too difficult. I'm open for any and all suggestions. I'm sure improvements can be made in that department. Spliting and merging forums themselves is much more difficult because you have to individually move each topic. But, like I said before, we have done this.

A lot of this is organization we have is historical. You know, when you first set up a forum and you are the only member, you just put up the first thing that comes to mind. As more people became involved, we've adjusted things. That is still possible, and essential.

[Kassen]

I know, I moved a lot of stuff on our own board. I was mainly commenting on the idea that the possible side effect of moving; interconnecting fora, was seen as desireable. I feared that this idea of moving fora closer together would in the meantime move some users further from the community.

I would instead be more interested in interconnecting for it´s own sake, I just phrased it badly.

I´m still not sure about the "synthesis" thing, a lot of that stuff depends on perspective; you can sort in many dimentions. A "poly dimentional index" where users can specify their perspective as a part of the interface would help but then posting becomes a exersise in formal logic and anthropology....

[paul e.]

so, is that a yes or a no....

btw i didn;t know 'fora' was the plural of 'forum', but one learns something everyday

maybe there should be a sub-sub forum on 'the logical and hierachal structure of non-hierachal super-sub and post-topic fora in a distributed textual space with non-linear topic isolators and pre-topic enhancers, and its anthro-morphic implications for life itself'

just a thought...

[Kassen]

I believe we have a "yes", Paul.

"Fora" is plural for "forum" in Latin, or so I believe, wether or not the host language´s rules for making plural should be used for borowed words is open for debate. I´d probably use "dykes" in english but arguably I´d have to use "dyken" byt my own reasoning.

More importantly; policy needs to be adapted to the situation. I hold Mosc in high regard for the way he hears voices, then decides. The way a online place is structured realy does have social side effects. Here I was observing the posibility of making the sorting system open to interpertation, then comenting on how this would make it harder to use. I was and am, hoping for a compromise that would unify the best elements of both worlds.
This is the difference between having a "engineering" forum and one on "mixers and their uses".

[elektro80]

...anthro-morphic implications for life itself'


Do they come with a red ballon and some funny hats?