We have a new forum: The Research Forum

[Skinner]

Elad just finished programming a cool new feature for DU. We call it the Research Forum. It's kinda like a wiki, and ultimately it's going to take the place of Demopedia, which we feel has been underutilized for a number of reasons.

The idea is to provide a collaborative space where DU members can work together to collect information and put it into a form that will be of value to our members.

We have pinned a thread to the top of that forum explaining how it works. We have also pinned a thread for questions and reports. Please read that information before you try it out.

The forum should appear in your forum listing between "Editorials & Other Articles" and "General Discussion."

Or, you can click this link to go directly there:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=358

Skinner, EarlG, and Elad
Democratic Underground Administrators

[WilliamPitt]

1. Woo!

:toast:

[Skinner]

3. Psst.

This might be a good place to post your book. ;-)

[WilliamPitt]

4. Aaaaaahhhhhhh

so.

:)

[CottonBear]

2. Cool! Thanks!

:toast: :) :toast: :) :toast: :) :toast: :)

[Midlodemocrat]

5. Wow!!!

What a great idea! As a professional researcher, I can't thank you enough for that.

:kudos:

[stop the bleeding]

6. Thank you

checking it out right now.

[cry baby]

7. thanks!

[Fenris]

8. I liked the concept of Demopedia...

But I felt for a concept like that to work it needed to be implemented within the forum itself. You guys have really outdone yourselves on this one! :thumbsup:

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

9. Thank you!

:hug: Love you guys.

[kentuck]

10. Great !

Have you thought of a way to slow down GD on those busy days? Maybe put the media comments, about Tweety, NYTimes, C-span all in one forum? That might thin it out a bit?

[WilliamPitt]

11. YO QUESTION

I see numbers of replies for each thread, but no link to either read those replies or make one. Am I dense?

[Skinner]

13. Read the thread pinned to the top of that forum.

It's called "How to use this Forum"

[northamericancitizen]

15. Thanks. Easier to use than Demopedia . Question...

in Glossary when I clicked on letter T nothing happened. Where is Tweety?

[Skinner]

16. The glossary is currently empty.

People need to fill it in.

[northamericancitizen]

17. thanks. now I have to go read the "How to..."

[northamericancitizen]

18. dupe. sorry

[Dark]

26. Question.

Will moderators also gauge the reliability of the sources?

For example, if someone links to some conspiracy website, will it be deleted, moved, or left alone?

[Skinner]

29. If necessary, we will moderate it.

If enough people use it, there is a chance that it will be self-regulating, in the way that wikipedia is. People who try to pass off speculation as fact will be challenged on it and will be forced to back up their assertions.

[AntiFascist]

62. Ok, here's a question....

if we receive a load of information from an undisclosed source that is disputable, what if we label it as such for the purposes of RESEARCHING some of the material to determine if it is in fact factual or can be backed up?

[Skinner]

63. I guess it depends.

Since the question is hypothetical, I'm not going to make any definitive statement either for or against. I will agree that if such information is posted in the Research Forum, it should be clearly labeled and explained to put it in the proper context.

[AntiFascist]

65. Fair enough. Thanks for responding! nt

[twaddler01]

12. Excellent Idea!

:thumbsup:

[mmonk]

14. Good idea

[Fenris]

19. Question Skinner...

I've noticed that a lot of people in the gallery are, um, not among the living anymore. Is there a way to sort of clean house?

[Skinner]

21. Yes. It's an "Open Edit" thread.

So anyone can go in there and edit it. Just read the instructions pinned at the top of that forum.

[Cha]

39. Isn't it still nice to

have their picture since they contributed so much, even though they've passed on to the big DU in the sky?

[BigBearJohn]

20. I love the way you are always improving this place. What a great landlord!

[Carolab]

22. How is this different from demopedia? n/t

[Skinner]

24. It's quite similar to Demopedia.

It's based on the idea of a wiki. But we felt that Demopedia was not being utilized enough because it was completely different software, and was not integrated with the DU forums.

The research forum is a combination of a wiki and our forum software, so it should be much easier for our members to use.

[Carolab]

25. I see...good thinking! Thanks for doing this for us!

:yourock:

[mzmolly]

23. YIPPEE SKIPPY!

:toast:

[Mugsy]

27. I have a suggestion: allow members to list their archives.

I have a suggestion...

Like probably hundreds of DU regulars on here, I have amassed a large archive of audio, video, pictures and documents that I'm sure could be a great resource for anyone looking for a particular clip or revealing/long-lost document.

I have from 10-20GB of stuff archived since mid-2003 (and a few items older than that).

Also, just the list itself can be a great "eye-opener" into the extent and scope of the issues and misdeeds of the most criminal administration in history.

[Skinner]

30. Unfortunately, I don't think we could do that.

We have too many members, and not enough server space.

I might suggest you set up a website. Sounds like you've got lots of good stuff. Then you could post an index in the DU Research forum.

[Mugsy]

49. You can't store a list?

You can't store a list of files available along with who has it???

I'm not suggesting DU store hundreds of gigabytes of files, just an index of who has what.

[Skinner]

51. Sure, we can store a list.

In fact, you could start a list in the Research forum.

I meant that we could not store 20 gigs of files. I apologize that I was not clear.

[PurpleChez]

28. Coolness! n/t

[Catamount]

31. Thanks, DU is getting better and better!

:thumbsup:

[belle]

32. Neat.

[Angry Girl]

33. Great job, Elad, EarlG, and Skinner!

:headbang: :yourock: :headbang: :yourock: :headbang: :yourock: :headbang: :yourock:

[Catamount]

34. Wow! I love all the schrub's nicknames!

And it's good to see some of the faces behind the names!
Thanks again!

[graywarrior]

35. Makes me want to donate more money.

[BrklynLiberal]

40. That was my first thought as well!!!

Thank you so much Skinner, Elad and EarlG!!

[DrDebug]

36. You forgot one little point

I quickly put one together for Demopedia as well and since this one has no authors you'd really need it.

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Demopedia:General_disclaimer

Demopedia is a part of Democratic Underground, LLC. Demopedia cannot guarantee, in any way whatsoever, the validity of the information found here. Any information found on this site can be incomplete, outdated, incorrect and it is upto the user to check the validity of any information found here.

None of the authors, contributors, sponsors, administrators, sysops, or anyone else connected with Demopedia in any way whatsoever can be responsible for the appearance of any inaccurate or libelous information or for your use of the information contained in or linked from these web pages.

No consequential damages can be sought against Demopedia, as it is a voluntary association of individuals developed freely to create various open source online educational, cultural and informational resources. This information is being given to you gratuitously and there is no agreement or understanding between you and Demopedia regarding your use or modification of this information beyond the GNU Free Documentation License; neither is anyone at Demopedia responsible should someone change, edit, modify or remove any information that you may post on Demopedia or any of its associated projects.

Thank you for spending the time to read this page, and please enjoy your experience at Demopedia.

[Skinner]

37. Good reminder. I think we should probably do that.

BTW: You have done an amazing job on Demopedia. I feel bad that all of your hard work is not getting as much attention as it should be. Our hope is that by creating the Research Forum, all the research work that DUers have already done will get a wider audience than it currently does. We should probably discuss with you directly what the new Research Forum means for you and for Demopedia.

[DrDebug]

38. I think the best thing is to keep the stuff which is there

Because transfering everything will be hard since it's a different coding and some pages contain some HTML as well, so that's almost intransferable and I don't think it'll cost that much webspace since it's main text and the images are linked off-site.

One strong point about demopedia was the URL naming and maybe Elad can look into adding that for the research as well. If you google BFEE, the demopedia entry will be #4 and #5 in google (there are two entries) because the term is in the URL and with this system you'll loose it. So maybe he can eventually program that in as well. So it did get some good attention, but not many edits ;)

So instead of:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x254

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x254&title=Hula_Jaw

Because it'll increase the rating in the search systems ;)

[Skinner]

43. That URL idea is really good.

I'm going to talk to Elad about it.

I understand your point about keeping the stuff in Demopedia that is there. I agree that moving all of it into the Research forum is not feasible. I would still like to talk to you directly about the future of Demopedia. We have some ideas of what to do with it.

[Taxloss]

41. Have I done this right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=358&topic_id=251&mesg_id=251

Is this what you are looking for? Is it formatted correctly? Is it useful?

[Skinner]

44. It looks like you did it exactly right.

:thumbsup:

[Taxloss]

45. Thanks.

I hope it does a bit of good. It's just dead information sitting in my archives.

[Skinner]

47. May I ask how you were able to interview them?

I'm guessing that the chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition doesn't much like talking to libs.

[Taxloss]

57. You may ask.

I said that I was writing a feature for a new, glossy UK news and culture monthly - I never lied, omitted or distorted. I approached all those individuals through their published approach numbers. Rev. Sheldon was actually very keen to talk and his staff were very helpful. The Christian Coalition and Focus on the Family turned me down flat.

For Rev. Sheldon, I called the TVC's HQ a couple of times and spoke to some very friendly staff there. They said they'd see what they could do, which every PR person in the world says all the time. Then a day or two later the same woman calls back and said that Rev. Sheldon would in LA and available to talk at X time. cleared the time, made the call, and conducted the interview. I think it's quite a good inteview, and it aided the piece no end.

As per Focus on the Fmaily, I'll PM you the email exchange ...

[ourbluenation]

42. This is very cool - you guys are the best!

Thanks for all you do...

[NMDemDist2]

46. oooo I just had way too much fun in the glossary! Thanks a bunch

:yourock:

Elad is my Hero :loveya:

i wonder if the formatting from demopedia will transfer over with just cut and paste? it is very well done in Demopedia with the links to the old lounge threads and everything

[thinkingwoman]

48. Wow, you guys

never cease to amaze me! Thanks!

[terrya]

50. The DU Gallery is now in the Research Forum?

I've been meaning to update my pic...since the pic now in the Gallery can scare small children and pets. It's hideous beyond words.

But other than my picture....the Gallery is now officially in the Research Forum?

Thanks
terry

[Skinner]

52. Yes, it is now officially in the Research forum.

We think it will get more exposure in there.

[terrya]

53. Ok. Great idea, by the way.

Thanks.

[Skinner]

58. You're welcome. (nt)

[AspenRose]

67. Where's the pet gallery....

or am I missing something....

[Just Me]

54. Oh!!! Awesome!!! I love it!!!!

Thanks!!! :bounce:

:yourock:

[Book Lover]

55. Ow! Was that my ass being kicked?

I think this is a great solution for the problem of localizing information. Many thanks, folks!

[onehandle]

56. We've had this at the Bartcop Forum for a long time.

The Evidence Room:

http://bartcopnation.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=8

Demopedia highlighted there as well in a thread.

[FizzFuzz]

59. Thank You, Skinner, EarlG and Elad, Great idea!!

You are so damn good at keeping this place together.

Best. Website. EVER!

:hi:

[garthranzz]

60. Another Excellent Idea

that makes a great site, perhaps the best of its kind, even greater.

:applause:

Principles, to be true, must be confirmed by facts and experience.

[bigwillq]

61. Cool idea!

Thanks guys for all of your hard work. DU is really the best website on the net. :hi: :bounce:

[bridgit]

64. cool...

B-)

[silverweb]

66. Simply brilliant.

Skinner, EarlG, and Elad, you guys are nothing short of awesome!

:yourock:

:applause:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

68. That's...

...really fucking cool!

Great job. Suppose it's probably time for a donation again.

[Peter Frank]

69. From what I've seen, it looks great... n/t

[nodehopper]

70. that is awesome!

[RepublicanElephant]

71. cool!

gonna link to it!

[VOX]

72. Incredibly useful, and absolutely terrific! n/t

[salukidem]

73. swell

[EFerrari]

76. Welcome to Du, salukidem.

:hi:

[personman]

74. Suggestion...

Anyone think it might be useful if each research topic could branch out like replies to threads in other forums?

That might simplify navigation and make the whole thing less linear.

[Skinner]

75. I think you misunderstand how this works.

The purpose of the research forum is not discussion. The purpose is to provide members with a tool to collaboratively organize information. The "responses" are not replies to the original post. They are edits to the original post. Everyone is editing the same post.

Try it out for yourself and see how it works.

[personman]

77. I think I get it, this is what I mean:

To give you a better idea of what I'm suggesting, here is a simple visual.

Edit: Some of the sub-branches aren't positioned correctly because of how this is being displayed, but hopefully you get the idea.

DU Research Forum
|
|_Iraq War
| |
| |_Intelligence
| | |
| | |_Niger Claims
| | | |
| | | |_Plamegate
| | | |
| | | |_Fitzy Baby
| | |
| | |_Aluminum Tubes
| |
| |_War Crimes
| | |
| | |_White Phosphor
| | |
| | |_Torture
| | |
| | |_Abu Ghraib

Each of these headings would be it's own research topic. Anyone can edit each topic, create new topics, and create a new branch off of another topic. In the event that two different topics would have the same sub-topic requiring the same information, they could just both link to the same article. I guess it would be it's own sort of information-web because all the topics could be cross linked into each other.
Ideas aren't linear, so if it's a realistic option to do otherwise, why represent them that way? (I'm not suggesting this IS a realistic option, that's all up to you guys :) )

Pros:
It is it's own form of visual aid, and can make it easier to understand nuances and relevancies in complex ideas.
It makes navigation easier, with a glance and a click or two you can get right to meat of some possibly obscure nuance of an important issue.
More flexible, less linear.

Cons:
(Expensive?)Pain in the ass to implement?
Too flexible for it's own good?
Too complex?

This might just sound good to me on paper at the moment (Bong hits?), and be totally impractical to implement or use, but at the chance I'm on to something I decided I should at least put the idea out here.
I thought of this a couple days before you debuted the research forum ironically, while I was trying to think of a good way for DUers to catalog all the information we are always digging up.

BTW, I love DU and I think the Research Forum is a great idea. If this is, in your opinion, too impractical to implement or use, or a stupid idea in general, then just disregard this. I realize I have no idea what all would be involved in creating something like this, and therefore am in no position to say whether this is practical or not. I intend this only as a possible suggestion, and not as any form of criticism of the research forum.

Thanks Skinner!

Keep on DUin what you DU. :)

[Skinner]

78. This looks like an indexing issue to me.

The way you present it, it looks like a discussion thread. But I don't see how we could have discussion threads like you suggest, and still keep the open-editing wiki-style functionality.

We have an index for the forum, and I think it would make sense to organize it in the way that you suggest. Doing so would not be a programming issue -- it would be a matter of people doing the work.

If I misunderstand your suggestion, I apologize.

[KoKo]

79. I tried to post something today way after your announcement and

couldn't figure out how to use it. The posts there seemed to go nowhere..and I didn't understand the "Edit Thingies" that you cautioned about.

I was tryin to post a thread where we could do some research on Rove/Abramoff connections to the 2004 Elections. I did check out the already existing thread about Abramoff but what I wanted to post didn't
seem to fit there.

Some of us who want to research on threads might just need a place that would "Archive" a post so that we could keep posting on a thread and add new info. What the "Research Forum" does is force one into a post where folks "edit" in some kind of "html" format that lots of us not "computer literate folks" are uncomfortable with.

I don't know how to explain it better...except that it doesn't seem that some of us who aren't as much Computer Whizzes as Admins and others can find a way to keep adding and revising the posts there.

I guess my post might not be clear that it sounds dumb or that I need to take a Computer Course or something...but that's what I thought. I never could figure out Demopedia, either, so I guess I'm sort of "challenged" computer wise.

If you have any tips that could help some of us that you could add may be it would work...but maybe not...

[Skinner]

80. Did you read the "How to use this Forum" Thread?

That is the best place to start:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x3

Then, I would suggest you play around with the practice thread to see how it works:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_oet&address=358x288

[KoKo]

81. I did read the "How to Use" and couldn't understand the "html edit"

explanations. But, perhaps the instructions are less complicated than they sounded on my first read.

I'll check out your practice thread though and see if that helps me.

Thanks!

[IDemo]

82. I posted a topic but will probably refrain from updating it

- "a collaborative space where DU members can work together to collect information and put it into a form that will be of value to our members."

I don't view subjects such as nicknames or 'hula jaw' as particularly valuable information for DU'ers, much less worth even casual research efforts. I'll keep my 'peak oil' and other threads in the appropriate forums for the time being.

Great idea, though.

[Skinner]

83. Perhaps you are not aware...

...that we locked all of the "nicknames" threads two days ago.

You should keep your peak oil threads in the appropriate forum. But if you ever feel like organizing the information into some form so members can more easily find it, you should consider the research forum.