Create specific Community forums

[KC]

Would this be useful? Bring c2e right down to the community / community league level by creating a very distinctive section where each and every community (150+) would have its own dedicated forum.

People could then discuss issues very specific to their immediate area. c2e could then serve as a city wide hub for Edmontonians to visit.

I could see it becoming a very dynamic addition since there are always so many little local issues going unaddressed. Eg. When are they going to repave our lanes, when are the meters being moved outside, what's happening with the former drug house up the street, how do we raise more funds for our playground, we need volunteers next week...

(Note: I've always thought an entity like the Edmonton Journal, EFCL, etc. would host such a forum but so far... not.)

[Titanium48]

I think that would result in a lot of empty or nearly empty forums. It might work better with larger subareas though. In my part of town, the "North Central" forum might include everything south of Yellowhead between the city center airport and the LRT, including Boyle-McCauley, Alberta Avenue, Parkdale, Delton and a few others. Others subareas might include Downtown (including Oliver and the north edge), Millwoods, Riverbend-Terwillegar, Castle Downs, St. Albert, Sherwood Park, etc.

[IanO]

We looked at doing this in the past, even having the EFCL promote people to come on here and set up their forum, but it didnt take root and to be honest the idea of 150 new dedicated forums seems a bit much.

I'd rather we keep it as is or start a small thread for your community should it warrant one.

[edmonton daily photo]

You could do it by Wards!

[IanO]

Even then it is generally inactive.

[Komrade]

Wards or quadrants make most sense, but I think it would be better to allow it to grow organically.

Nothing stopping me from making a Beverly or Northeast Edmonton thread.

[Gord Lacey]

And how would threads be managed then? Would a new building going up at an address be discussed in the community forum, or in a different forum? Would the new bathrooms on Whyte Ave be in the Strathcona forum?

[RichardS]

Originally Posted by IanO

We looked at doing this in the past, even having the EFCL promote people to come on here and set up their forum, but it didnt take root (...).

This...

We offered. The take rate was zero.

[Thomas Hinderks]

Originally Posted by Komrade

Wards or quadrants make most sense, but I think it would be better to allow it to grow organically.

Just my personal opinion from talking to folks I know.

C2E has grown organically and in someways very successfully.
In other ways unfortunately a failure, not anyone's fault, just the way it is.

It has become the Downtown forum to many people and that, again, is both good and bad.

It doesn't reflect the voice of Edmonton as a whole, just one demographic and only a small sampliing at that.

It doesn't reflect the needs and prioroties of Edmonton as a whole, just one demographic and only a small sampliing at that.

There is little to attract families, heaven forbid those in the suburbs and lord help anyone that enters a conversation that is not forum savy.

Could it still become what it was originally intended...of course, but it would be an uphill battle and require a ton of change.

I have had a number of people that have looked over the forum and even entered conversations and they are not coming back for a number of reasons...so it would mean reselling the entire forum to the community again. Massive job, whose gonna do it?

It would mean a change in moderation. That wouldn't be popular.

And it would take investment.

I personally think it would be easier to start over if it really is meant to be inclusive and that is the desire.

C2E is what it has organically grown to, accept it for what it is, while it lasts.

My opinion anyways.

Tom

[KC]

Yeah, I have to admit, its grass roots orientation would be problematic and not in alignment with current user expectations.

Maybe something for one or the other media outlets to undertake (such as the EJ or ES) as it could serve as an avenue for news origination and dissemination.

[Thomas Hinderks]

Originally Posted by KC

Yeah, I have to admit, its grass roots orientation would be problematic and not in alignment with current user expectations.

Maybe something for one or the other media outlets to undertake (such as the EJ or ES) as it could serve as an avenue for news origination and dissemination.

Don't sound so dismayed.

There is room in Edmonton for a more "Middle of the Road" forum in Greater Edmonton, it's just not this one.

Since C2E started more of the folks that are suburbanites, family types etc. have become more forum literate and just because this one "turns them off" doesn't mean that a new one with a fresh start can't accommodate them.

The problem will be that if and when that happens C2E will become much less relevant to the decision makers.

Meantime C2E fills a niche'.

For me I find t interesting trying to understand the points of view and it's been educational in many ways.

But for the most part I don't personally believe it reflects the needs, wants, desires and opinions of the majority of Edmontonians.

As I have discovered, anecdotaly, is that for the most part what is a hot topic here isn't a big deal for the rank and file. What is sneered at here is often very important to the masses.

It's interesting, educational and it is what it is. Definitely a study of human interaction.

My opinion

[KC]

No, no. I'm not dismayed. I just throw out ideas to see what will stick or to challenge conventional beliefs, spur debate to generate new and better ideas, etc.

I do enjoy hearing your insights. Thanks.

I'd guess that one could say; 'Most people don't care about anything'. That's the law of averages at work. So change often takes a group with strong vested interests to ram through their position and C2e is just one more outlet for advocates to polish up and push - and recruit for - their favoured agendas.

I guess, just as there is a vast diversity of 'positions' out there, there is a need for diversity of representative forum providers to collectivize those positions. However, a community level entity may solve and create a lot of small personal level issues but never anything with a "critical mass" that would spur support from someone with an agenda. In other words it will take a Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia) type to drive it.

[240GLT]

^ I think it's quite disingenuous to say that "most people don't care about anything"... just that what's important to some people here, really isn't that important to Edmontonians as a whole. That doesn't make the average Edmontonians' concerns any less valid, and certainly doesn't make the concerns of this forums' users any more valid. Hwoever, that is the myopic stance that many here take. I too would like a more inclusive C2E... as it used to be. This forum serves as an outlet for a small fraction fo the population. Many of us are involved in our communities in ways that this forum could never replicate, and affect real changes that takes real work... so much more so than subscribing to an internet message board.

[IanO]

Tom

I really liked the statement below, but feel as though a finger is being pointed at this vocal minority that is 'out of touch' with what the majority of Edmontonians want.

'It's interesting, educational and it is what it is. Definitely a study of human interaction.'

In my opinion and one of the reasons a bunch of us got together early on to think about the idea that ended up manifesting itself as C2E was to connect people, ideas, the region and promote discussion on things that perhaps had few people defending them or advocating for them such as the downtown, expanded LRT, TODs, living local, etc. etc.

This site was never just about one perspective, but rather has evolved into a site that perhaps encourages certain elements that are associated with a more singular perspective simply because people are passionate about encouraging people to think about how we grow, live and work and what kind of city that therein provides us. Correlation of cause and effect is still not top of mind, perhaps it never will be, but the choices 'we have made' have led us down a path that we are now hoping to correct to a certain degree.

If I ask my office (40 people) if they care about Capital BLVD, the arena, Alberta avenue, mature infill guidelines, reduced parking requirements, etc. etc, many might have a comment, but few would say it is 'important to them' for they expect others to advocate for those kind of things and make our city a better place by way of certain guidelines, regulations, investments, etc.

For far too long we forgot about the heart (central edmonton as a whole/think MNO) of this city and it shows. We needed to regain a balance and in doing so many people had to be more vocal and direct than perhaps people are used to.

The mold is slowly being broken and as you said, this is interesting and educational, but also about making real change as 240 points out.

[Thomas Hinderks]

Ian

I really liked the statement below, but feel as though a finger is being pointed at this vocal minority that is 'out of touch' with what the majority of Edmontonians want.

Funny I look at it at the site being populated by people that share a targeted view and mission. Which is fine.

but rather has evolved into a site that perhaps encourages certain elements that are associated with a more singular perspective

Which is essentially what I said so we agree.

Where we differ is that the vocal majority on the site often (ECCA debate is the best example) that they represent the majority. (in the ECCA case most Edmontonians could have cared less one way or another IMO).

C2E has a downtown, urban focus...that's fine and that's the way it is, but it is not inclusive which it was meant to be.

Ian...I am stating what I (and many others) see, doesn't make it right or wrong, just the way it is.

But that leaves room for an alternative that is more inclusive and more relective of the average Edmontonian.

You should note I have not said to change C2E...it is what it is accept it or don't.

My opinion

Tom

[kcantor]

yes, c2e is what it is. or c2e has grown in to what it has nurtured, previous discussions notwithstanding. i don't think those are the same thing if one really wants to ask "why are we what we are and how can we make what we are better". if c2e doesn't want to become the online equivalent of a venting column, it will need to figure out some way to conduct itself that differentiates it from a venting column. and if it can't do that, there shouldn't be a lot of surprise when it comes to looking at where c2e will end up. it may still retain some entertainment value but that isn't synonymous with "the real changes that take real work" referenced a few posts up. there is a common theme to the debate - a debate that has been going on for a long time - that things like adding new forum categories will not resolve. my thoughts anyway:

from "grow up c2e members":

on the other hand, i would also hope that c2e could align itself more closely with the editorial and letters to the editor sections of a newspaper (that may allow pseudonum signatures but do not publish anonymous writing) than the venting or on-line rants where anonymity seems to ultimately resuslt in a completely different level/quality of discussion...

even in canada you can't get a phone (or at least you can't get a land line) and you can't get a lot of other things anonymously either. if you consider that you are gaining access to something (whether that's an on-line forum or a bulletin board or a face book page), it's not that much of change to assume that you have to be anonymous to do so. if you want to remain anonymous, you don't have to go there. not everyone has to know everything just because you aren't entitled to full anonymity which is much like when you choose to exercise your franchise to vote. you can maintain the confidentiality of your choice on the ballot but you cannot anonymously get a ballot. as far as i'm concerned, if you're not prepared to be accountable for what you say or post (or at least be connected to what you say or post), then don't say it and don't post it.

from "negative behaviour fosters negative behaviour in online communities":

a 19 year old probably has a different perspective to go along with his opinion on pensions than an 80 year old (with good reason) and an 80 year old probably has a different perspective to go along with his opinion on rap groups than an 18 year old (also likely with good reasons).

so when you read posts from those different perspectives, you probably respond differently and with a little more respect knowing where they come from than you might when they are completely anonymous

from "why the childish replies":

Originally Posted by _____
I agree ____. I've noticed it numerous times too.
I believe people feel they can say things over the net which they wouldn't do so otherwise because of the anonymous nature of it.

agreed - although i had not yet had a chance to express that sentiment here on yet another thread, most of the regulars here - whether posters or lurkers - probably already know my thoughts on anonymity even without my having done so.

there's probably plenty of other threads including not only the ecca discussions tom referenced but everything from social media, sarah palin, g8 conferences, new world orders, capital punishment, to posting daily headline links that exhibit the same characteristics... the underlying issue isn't a "downtown urban focus", it's how we conduct ourselves. maybe that means that those with a downtown urban focus are more forgiving of that conduct but even if that is the case i don't believe that that focus per se is "the problem".

[Thomas Hinderks]

Once again Mr.Cantor we agree

You quite succinctly point some of the negative characteristics I only eluded to.

It is more than just focus, it's attitude and how we act...which I don't see changing.

Yes anonymity is part of it, but there is more and that is the overall attitude the forum has developed...which I don't see changing.

If anything I believe C2E, in it's current incarnation, has reached it's zenith. Which it why I believe that sooner or later a more inclusive, mannered alternate will eventually come along and with it

C2E will become much less relevant to the decision makers

.

For now I enjoy C2E for what it is and no longer expect it to become more than what it is.

My opinion

Tom

[RichardS]

Originally Posted by kcantor

(...)
there's probably plenty of other threads including not only the ecca discussions tom referenced but everything from social media, sarah palin, g8 conferences, new world orders, capital punishment, to posting daily headline links that exhibit the same characteristics... the underlying issue isn't a "downtown urban focus", it's how we conduct ourselves. maybe that means that those with a downtown urban focus are more forgiving of that conduct but even if that is the case i don't believe that that focus per se is "the problem".

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

(...)
Yes anonymity is part of it, but there is more and that is the overall attitude the forum has developed...which I don't see changing.

If anything I believe C2E, in it's current incarnation, has reached it's zenith. Which it why I believe that sooner or later a more inclusive, mannered alternate will eventually come along and with it(...)
For now I enjoy C2E for what it is and no longer expect it to become more than what it is.

(...)

2 posts that sum up most of the feedback I receive on C2E.

...many potential posters are tired of trying to get a point across only to be shouted down....

...too many threads becoming a continued personal diatribe between individuals...almost like a long-married couple bickering over stuff but not brave enough to apologize...or divorce...

...the attitude...if it isn't downtown - it sucks...that I hear over and over...

...that C2E only represents a small community within Edmonton...that is oft said...and from my experience...increasingly accurate...

...conspiracy theories and outright laughable conclusions/discussions....laughing is in the eye of the beholder...but that is a comment I get...and aligns to the anonymity arguments kcantor brings up...

we've tried different styles of moderation...long story...

The reality here is that C2E was meant to be what 240GLT references...this was meant to be an idea incubator for people to then take these ideas and put in the effort to action them. There are several things that have come out of this...probably the ONLY reason why I keep this thing up...but it is usually the same suspects that show up... That is the basis for the comments I make about hard work, effort, and time when it comes to positive change in Edmonton. 240 is correct when stating...

Originally Posted by 240GLT

(...) affect real changes that takes real work... so much more so than subscribing to an internet message board(...)

[Sonic Death Monkey]

I've always seen C2E more of a respite from the negative nellyism that is found in the comments sections of the Journal, CBC and CTV, or your average SUN editorial. C2E is at its best when truly Great Ideas are generated, critiqued and debated. That came to fore when we were discussing redevelopment ideas for YXD or fixing the Sask Drive hairpin.