There was a group suggestion thread about 6 weeks ago, as a result of which, 4 new groups were created. There is no ongoing process for suggesting groups, for a few reasons: Deimos doesn't want to...
Deimos doesn't want to fragment this community too much while it's still small.
There is a key piece of functionality that needs to be built before sub-groups are useful.
In the meantime, I recommend you post your privacy-related topics in ~tech with a "privacy" tag (like everyone else has been doing), and your futurology-related topics in either ~science or ~misc with a "futurology" tag.
At the moment, all posts in a sub-group are displayed in the parent group (check out the ~tildes.official posts in ~tildes). This needs to be changed so that posts from the sub-group are...
At the moment, all posts in a sub-group are displayed in the parent group (check out the ~tildes.official posts in ~tildes). This needs to be changed so that posts from the sub-group are quarantined from the parent group. Otherwise, there's no point creating a sub-group to collect posts about a subject - because they'll all appear in the parent group even if you've unsubscribed from the sub-group.
So, for example, we might want to create ~games.computer to collect all the posts in ~games about computer games. However, anyone subscribed to ~games will still see all the computer games posts, so the benefit of having a sub-group isn't present.
Yes, I think for now it would be more than enough to post topics concerning thinks like privacy into ~tech. In the future we could think about splitting it up into ~tech.privacy or other sub-groups.
Yes, I think for now it would be more than enough to post topics concerning thinks like privacy into ~tech. In the future we could think about splitting it up into ~tech.privacy or other sub-groups.
At the moment a very general ~outdoors group would be neat. If I wanted to post a thread relating to, say, hiking, I'd be a little unclear whether it should go to ~health, ~hobbies, or ~sports....
At the moment a very general ~outdoors group would be neat. If I wanted to post a thread relating to, say, hiking, I'd be a little unclear whether it should go to ~health, ~hobbies, or ~sports. I'd probably go with ~hobbies in that example, but I could see someone else going otherwise and not being wrong.
We had a ~lifestyle at one point that was intended to cover outdoor activities and such, but it wasn't used much and I think just confused people more.
We had a ~lifestyle at one point that was intended to cover outdoor activities and such, but it wasn't used much and I think just confused people more.
I think before deciding whether to implement new groups or not we need to do some assessments. I suggest: Determine how many users are in a group and if that is enough to fragment it and still be...
I think before deciding whether to implement new groups or not we need to do some assessments.
I suggest:
Determine how many users are in a group and if that is enough to fragment it and still be active?
Determine how many posts per week/month are already coming through about a topic and is it enough to sustain a specific community based around it?
Survey the users, once you've narrowed down what topics might be added do a survey and ask which of the groups people want the most? (Dont do a first-past-the-post voting system though or else the majority is likely to be unhappy).
If a subgroup is to be created you should then ask the larger group members whether they actually want to fragment the community or not.
Edit: This is specific procedure meant for creating subgroups not for creating a group around a topic that doesn't fit anywhere else.
In my opinion I'd prefer creating new features, implementing policies, and increasing documentation before making more communities (which would make it harder to manage).
I'd have to disagree, going off the principle that all content in a sub-group should be a subset of the parent, ~science just doesn't cover everything regarding space-related activity. 'ULA fires...
I'd have to disagree, going off the principle that all content in a sub-group should be a subset of the parent, ~science just doesn't cover everything regarding space-related activity. 'ULA fires executives' (not real news) is not a science-related topic but would be desirable in a space-related group
You're right: the science of space and the technology of space are different topics. As such, a ~science.space sub-group would need to be complemented by a ~tech.space sub-group. ~science.space...
You're right: the science of space and the technology of space are different topics. As such, a ~science.space sub-group would need to be complemented by a ~tech.space sub-group.
~science.space would cover astronomy, cosmology, exobiology, and such things. In practical terms, it would cover discoveries of exoplanets, the theories about the historical areology of Mars like where the water went, and such things.
~tech.space would cover rocketry, and space agencies. In practical terms, it would cover the latest rocket launches from Earth, any news about companies that make rockets, and such things.
That's my opinion, anyway. I'm subscribed to /r/Space on Reddit, and I find it frustrating that all the stuff I'm interested in, such as exoplanets and Mars and theories of galaxy formation, is mixed in with stuff I'm not interested in, such stories about SpaceX and weather satellite launches and how long Curiosity has been roving on Mars. The sciences of astronomy and cosmology are different than the engineering technology used to get to space.
There was a group suggestion thread about 6 weeks ago, as a result of which, 4 new groups were created. There is no ongoing process for suggesting groups, for a few reasons:
Deimos doesn't want to fragment this community too much while it's still small.
There is a key piece of functionality that needs to be built before sub-groups are useful.
In the meantime, I recommend you post your privacy-related topics in ~tech with a "privacy" tag (like everyone else has been doing), and your futurology-related topics in either ~science or ~misc with a "futurology" tag.
Being?
At the moment, all posts in a sub-group are displayed in the parent group (check out the ~tildes.official posts in ~tildes). This needs to be changed so that posts from the sub-group are quarantined from the parent group. Otherwise, there's no point creating a sub-group to collect posts about a subject - because they'll all appear in the parent group even if you've unsubscribed from the sub-group.
So, for example, we might want to create ~games.computer to collect all the posts in ~games about computer games. However, anyone subscribed to ~games will still see all the computer games posts, so the benefit of having a sub-group isn't present.
Why do you think the current groups aren't sufficient for these? Why do you think either of these will have enough traffic to sustain them?
Yes, I think for now it would be more than enough to post topics concerning thinks like privacy into ~tech. In the future we could think about splitting it up into ~tech.privacy or other sub-groups.
Here is an oldish post from Deimos on the topic that lead to the creation of several groups that are currently on the website.
Just for some context.
I think Futurology posts could fit into ~science, ~tech, or ~humanities. It's a very broad topic.
At the moment a very general ~outdoors group would be neat. If I wanted to post a thread relating to, say, hiking, I'd be a little unclear whether it should go to ~health, ~hobbies, or ~sports. I'd probably go with ~hobbies in that example, but I could see someone else going otherwise and not being wrong.
We had a ~lifestyle at one point that was intended to cover outdoor activities and such, but it wasn't used much and I think just confused people more.
Ah, gotcha. Having been around only a week I figured there may have been some context I was missing :)
I'm looking forward to the August post. It's gonna be a monster.
Awesome! Thanks for passing that along.
I think before deciding whether to implement new groups or not we need to do some assessments.
I suggest:
Edit: This is specific procedure meant for creating subgroups not for creating a group around a topic that doesn't fit anywhere else.
In my opinion I'd prefer creating new features, implementing policies, and increasing documentation before making more communities (which would make it harder to manage).
Also pleaseee add ~space . Space news just doesn't feel right in ~science or ~tech
I'd have to disagree, going off the principle that all content in a sub-group should be a subset of the parent, ~science just doesn't cover everything regarding space-related activity. 'ULA fires executives' (not real news) is not a science-related topic but would be desirable in a space-related group
You're right: the science of space and the technology of space are different topics. As such, a ~science.space sub-group would need to be complemented by a ~tech.space sub-group.
~science.space would cover astronomy, cosmology, exobiology, and such things. In practical terms, it would cover discoveries of exoplanets, the theories about the historical areology of Mars like where the water went, and such things.
~tech.space would cover rocketry, and space agencies. In practical terms, it would cover the latest rocket launches from Earth, any news about companies that make rockets, and such things.
That's my opinion, anyway. I'm subscribed to /r/Space on Reddit, and I find it frustrating that all the stuff I'm interested in, such as exoplanets and Mars and theories of galaxy formation, is mixed in with stuff I'm not interested in, such stories about SpaceX and weather satellite launches and how long Curiosity has been roving on Mars. The sciences of astronomy and cosmology are different than the engineering technology used to get to space.
... and/or ~tech.space, depending on whether the topic is about new exoplanets being discovered or about the latest private rocket to fly to orbit.