Warnock's dilemma - Regarding it and potential issues and solutions

[Zehra]

For those who are not aware of what Warnock's dilemma is, the following quoted text is sourced from Wikipedia:

Warnock's dilemma, named for its originator Bryan Warnock, is the problem of interpreting a lack of response to a posting in a virtual community.[1] The term originally referred to mailing list discussions, but has been applied to Usenet posts, blogs, web forums, and online content in general.[2] The dilemma arises because a lack of response does not necessarily imply that no one is interested in the topic, but could also mean for example that readers find the content to be exceptionally good (leaving nothing for commenters to add).

While it is easy to understand that many posts/threads do not get replies, as they can be announcements, notifications or in general an update. Exceptions to this do apply.

Examples:

• A map maker releases a map, but lack of comments may leave one wondering if the map was good or bad.
• Proposal of changes for adding a feature to BZFlag are made, but lack of commentary from users leaves it uncertain if they are for, against or apathetic.
• Overviews, analytics, statistics, and general theories/observations and notes are made. Lack of comments make it difficult to see what players think of them.

The question of "why not simply make a simple post saying 'I agree' or 'yes, this is a good idea'?" may be asked. But in reality, there exists forum rules to prevent the abuse of people artificially inflating their post count. Specifically forum rule 10 and 21: BZFlag Forum Rules

Obviously a short sentence or two complimenting a map or artwork and similar have not had issues, but at the same time, a thread of 20 repeat "comments" would not be sensible, even if that is indeed what players are thinking.

Polls may be an option, but polls apply to threads and are limited. (For instance agreeing with a couple of the posts, but not the entire thread or agreeing with one post, but not the rest of them.)

So, this is enough with the overall issues which is currently seen.

Proposed solutions/idea:
A small button near the report/quote buttons, but it provides 7 options for a post:

• The post is good. I have nothing to add to it.
• I agree/support.
• I disagree/oppose.
• The post is bad quality. It should be rewritten.
• The post itself is bad. It should be deleted.
• The post is unclear/vague. It should be clarified or rewritten.
• I don't care.

Some questions do remain, should posters know of who selected what options? Should options only be displayed while logged in? Should multiple selection of options be allowed?..etc

Thoughts?

-Zehra

[allejo]

Or copy every other social platform out there and add reactions to post.

I think the bigger problem is that just because players enjoy playing the game, doesn't mean they check the forums or don't care enough to read through long and wordy posts/threads.

[kierra]

[2] The dilemma arises because a lack of response does not necessarily imply that no one is interested in the topic

I would venture to guess that it implies exactly that. As allejo stated, the majority of players enjoy playing the game, but few routinely check the forums and those that do quickly lose interest in posts that are long and wordy.
Ideas, I think are best presented succinctly. The temptation to go into full detail results in lengthy posts that are Tl/dr for most.

but could also mean for example that readers find the content to be exceptionally good (leaving nothing for commenters to add).

Perhaps…but doubtful. I believe great ideas, maps etc will persist. Time has borne that out.

A small button near the report/quote buttons, but it provides 7 options for a post:
The post is good. I have nothing to add to it.
I agree/support.
I disagree/oppose.
The post is bad quality. It should be rewritten.
The post itself is bad. It should be deleted.
The post is unclear/vague. It should be clarified or rewritten.
I don't care.

This smacks of facebook/instagram type responses to posts. A post of real quality and substance doesn’t need an a, b, c,,or d etc response. Those just trivialize and become meaningless. Great ideas spur discussions and comments. Lack of comments/responses could easily translate into ‘no interest’.

[Zehra]

Reactions are close to what I was originally thinking, but didn't quite get what I'd been looking for.

---

And while it's true that good ideas do bring out discussions, it would be nice to have a feature which would be the equivalent of having clapped or nodded in approval to idea(s).

---

For the time being, in conclusion, it makes no sense to attempt doing it.

Reactions, upvotes/downvotes, like/dislike buttons have some aspects which don't make them ideal for this.

-Zehra

[macsforme]

I think reactions would be great. There have been many times when I wished to agree/concur with a post or show appreciation for it, but had no other commentary to add.

As others have stated/inferred, much of the non-engagement lately relates to forum topics that failed to communicate ideas clearly and concisely. There is also a certain logical flow (something like intro, argument, conclusion) which would help others grasp the idea more easily.

Finally, mere ideas without the willingness or ability to implement them are (IMHO) a waste at this point. Those who are willing and able to implement ideas generally have good ideas of their own to work on.

[Zehra]

Update:
Limited reactions would be useful. As in ones which state a post has been informative, helpful and similar, but reactions which are emoji-like, would not be good or useful and would do more harm than good.

-Zehra