PDA

View Full Version : What makes a good thread or a good post?



ameertawfik
May 29th, 2011, 07:02 PM
Hi all,

I am doing an academic research about content quality in online forums. In order to have an understanding of content quality, i need to study how members evaluate the content quality.

For that reason, I wish you could help me out by answering two questions:

1- What makes a good post ( Initial or reply post)?

2- What makes a good thread (The overall discussion)?

Thanks for your collaboration.

Aquix
May 29th, 2011, 07:17 PM
Poeple tell me twitter is good for crowd surfing but has nothing on forums. Some of my favorite thread titles.

1. Best movies that no one else have heard of.
2. Name ONE album thats you favorite.
3. The 3 websites you frequent the most.

That makes good threads for finding new stuff.

jerrrys
May 29th, 2011, 07:22 PM
#1 a descriptive title

#2 one that stays on topic

krapp
May 29th, 2011, 07:25 PM
Hi all,

I am doing an academic research about content quality in online forums. In order to have an understanding of content quality, i need to study how members evaluate the content quality.

For that reason, I wish you could help me out by answering two questions:

1- What makes a good post ( Initial or reply post)?

2- What makes a good thread (The overall discussion)?

Thanks for your collaboration.

Well, what's your working language theory?

ameertawfik
May 29th, 2011, 07:58 PM
Well, what's your working language theory?


Sorry, i could not get what do you mean by "language theory"?

Nevertheless, I actually want to study how users in this forum judge the quality of posts or threads. Content means text or the knowledge provided by members. The focus of this study is qualitative orientated. I am not interested in developing a Natural language processing tool to judge the content quality.

thanks for the reply.

krapp
May 29th, 2011, 09:17 PM
Sorry, i could not get what do you mean by "language theory"?

Nevertheless, I actually want to study how users in this forum judge the quality of posts or threads. Content means text or the knowledge provided by members. The focus of this study is qualitative orientated. I am not interested in developing a Natural language processing tool to judge the content quality.

thanks for the reply.

What I meant to ask was if you were approaching the study with a theoretical framework in mind. In most cases this would mean your study would have a social science bent; in your case this would mean approaching the study of online communication with a general theory of communication/language in mind, within which the quality of communication could be judged. Of course the theory wouldn't be your own; you would find one in the piles of scholarship on the subject.

Old_Grey_Wolf
May 29th, 2011, 10:02 PM
I am doing an academic research about content quality in online forums. In order to have an understanding of content quality, i need to study how members evaluate the content quality.

You may want to read a sticky at the top of the Absolute Beginner Talk forum -- http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1422475. I judge the initial thread posts to support forums based on whether the information provided allows me to have some idea of what the problem is and where to start investigating a solution to the problem. I judge responses to the threads based on whether the advice will work or not.

These are mostly technical forums and not social forums. The Community Cafe is a social forum; however, it is only a small part of the community.

Look above at the purpose of the Community Cafe

The Community Cafe
The Community Chat area is for lighthearted and enjoyable discussions, like you might find around a water cooler at work.

Almost any non-tech-support topic may be discussed here. Discussions on religion and politics are not allowed, except for politics directly related to free and open source issues. Any topic or discussion that causes problems or drama will be closed. This area is intended for fun and community building, not arguments. Please take those elsewhere. Thanks!

I judge Community Cafe threads and posts based upon if I find them "lighthearted and enjoyable discussions".

lightstream
May 29th, 2011, 10:57 PM
I was going to say the best posts are ones which ask what makes a good post, but I've just realised that even better posts are those which are made in reply to those posts. :guitar:

Macskeeball
May 30th, 2011, 12:05 AM
Good post: A message which is well written (masterful use of and care for the language) while also being informative, creative, helpful, and/or funny. Signs of critical thinking and of a deep understanding for the topic(s). Signs that the author cared about the content he or she made, by paying attention to detail. Maturity.

Good discussion: A thought-provoking thread containing several good posts written in a collaborative manner. Constructive criticism, not flamewars. Not mere "getting along," but a real chemistry between participants. Fun.

Good poster: Someone who cares about others, and thus does his or her part to ensure that there is more of the above, consistently.

Tibuda
May 30th, 2011, 01:31 AM
a good poster is what makes good posts

handy
May 30th, 2011, 01:45 AM
Content wise, what one person finds valuable another considers to be worthless.

Construction wise, some people post in a far more comprehensible fashion.

tgalati4
May 30th, 2011, 03:21 AM
To me the best posts are the ones that degenerate into "epic" threads. For instance, when someone concerned about internet security posts a picture of themselves wearing a tinfoil hat.

This is what I call "epic":

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1501407&highlight=tin+foil&page=2

PhillyPhil
May 30th, 2011, 03:48 AM
A good thread is one on a topic that interests ME! ;)

handy
May 30th, 2011, 04:28 AM
I have seen great threads/posts, that are very helpful to many others on subjects that I'm not interested in at all.

Just because I have no current need of the information doesn't mean that the quality & presentation of the information contained in such threads/posts is poor.

Courses for horses...

ameertawfik
May 30th, 2011, 04:57 AM
What I meant to ask was if you were approaching the study with a theoretical framework in mind. In most cases this would mean your study would have a social science bent; in your case this would mean approaching the study of online communication with a general theory of communication/language in mind, within which the quality of communication could be judged. Of course the theory wouldn't be your own; you would find one in the piles of scholarship on the subject.

Well, i do not have any communication theory in mind. However, your insight is valuable. I will try to map members opinions about quality into a more theoretical framework.

Hutom
May 30th, 2011, 12:47 PM
A good thread is one on a topic that interests ME! ;)

Cannot agree more.:)