I tried to make such a place online a while ago, but it didn't get a lot of use...I think we all theoretically want that, but in practice we have friends in real life that meet just enough of our needs that we don't have the energy for the community.
I still think it's possible to create one, but it would need a very different launch path and I'm not quite sure how the A to B thing works. (Then again, you might be an excellent person to handle some parts of the launch path. So if you wanna talk to me about the issues -- no sooner than September because I am hosed -- that might be fun.)
The trouble I had with it was that it wasn't integrated into places I frequented on the internet so I didn't visit it a whole lot. The energy for discussing would be there, but not the energy for visiting if that makes sense?
Yes, that makes a lot of sense and is useful feedback.
I wonder how it could be fixed. LJ would've worked five or ten years ago, but doesn't offer the scalability now. Facebook's community discussion features suck. *hm* I guess a site that offered RSS and widgets could be made to integrate with a variety of people's workflows.
From my experience in other blogsfirstfrostJune 12 2011, 14:03:34 UTC
I think that good discussion forums can spring naturally from communities that (1) have a large thoughtful readership, (2) have a tradition of discussion, and (3) also have someone who is willing to enforce comment policy. That can be (rare) enforced by social pressure from other commenters or (more commonly) enforced by the blogger
( ... )
Re: From my experience in other blogsdesireearmfeldtJune 12 2011, 15:08:12 UTC
But presumably social pressure and/or enforcement from the blogger can't cause good discussion to happen, as opposed to infrequent or shallow commenting...?
Re: From my experience in other blogspsychohistJune 12 2011, 21:08:52 UTC
I participate in parenting forums on two discussion sites. However, I think the reason those fora survive is that parents on those fora have parenting topics related to the topics of the fora that are probably not shared with anyone they know personally. That overcomes the fact that the demands of parenting are at odds with regular participation on an online forum, for those topics, though general purpose parenting advice is still difficult to get.
What I really want, though, is a small Montessori style school for my kids and kids like them offering parental participation.
I like many of these topics, particularly the sleep one (though "wait till L is older" is on my list too...), the house projects, the junk/cooking one.
I think I'd need to make it 13 or 14 hours for the food rule you mention to work for me; we often need to set an alarm for 6:30am and don't quite hit dinner until 7 or 7:15. But we do seem to mostly contain eating to 7am to 8pm.
It is not something I assume would apply to other people. Some people I know sleep very poorly if they go to bed hungry.
If I finish eating within 12 hours of waking up, I - Eat less junk - Because I am forced to eat dinner earlier I get less ravenous, so I am less likely to overeat at dinner. - I sleep better (less pressure on my bladder? I dunno) if several hours go between eating and bed. - I wake up better if I am hungry.
Comments 14
I still think it's possible to create one, but it would need a very different launch path and I'm not quite sure how the A to B thing works. (Then again, you might be an excellent person to handle some parts of the launch path. So if you wanna talk to me about the issues -- no sooner than September because I am hosed -- that might be fun.)
Reply
Reply
I wonder how it could be fixed. LJ would've worked five or ten years ago, but doesn't offer the scalability now. Facebook's community discussion features suck. *hm* I guess a site that offered RSS and widgets could be made to integrate with a variety of people's workflows.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
What I really want, though, is a small Montessori style school for my kids and kids like them offering parental participation.
Reply
Reply
I think I'd need to make it 13 or 14 hours for the food rule you mention to work for me; we often need to set an alarm for 6:30am and don't quite hit dinner until 7 or 7:15. But we do seem to mostly contain eating to 7am to 8pm.
Reply
Reply
If I finish eating within 12 hours of waking up, I
- Eat less junk
- Because I am forced to eat dinner earlier I get less ravenous, so I am less likely to overeat at dinner.
- I sleep better (less pressure on my bladder? I dunno) if several hours go between eating and bed.
- I wake up better if I am hungry.
Reply
Leave a comment