View Thread > H2O Meta > Interesting Uses > Allowing fast-contribution

I have not been using Rotisserie, not because I don't see its value, but because of time crunch with other projects. I am planning to use it in the near future.

Thiagi

of what I meant in a prior post.  Sometimes, there just isn't much to respond to, like now.

But in a post I just rated, I had some things to respond to -- yet I'm not "supposed" to.  I could do it anyway, respond here to some other post -- but the rotisserie format actively discourages that kind of behavior.

And therefore, makes it not really appropriate for the kind of discussions I usually am trying to foster.

WDave

Sometimes a no comment response is all you can say.

For those of us that have limited time, not having much to respond to is a blessing.

I don't agree that you are not supposed to reply/comment of items here other than your direct assignments.  I'd expect that if you are "allowed to", here, than you are supposed to.  If you were not supposed to there would not be a choice to do so and the system would not allow you to do it.  There usually does need to be unstructured communication in addition what is structured structured.  That does not mean unstructured is better, it just means that the structure is not complete.

I had stuff to do here, a rating and a response but did not notice any email.

I facilitate problem-solving and planning teams in a face-to-face situation. One of the major problems that I face is my inability to provide equal airtime for everyone: Discourage the dominating people and encourage the introverts. I find the rotisserie format is my ideal situation. Because the response requirements are randomized, nobody can accuse the facilitator of discrimination or partiality.

I feel similarly. The Rotisserie system seems like it could be really valuable, but I haven't made it part of the rhythms of my life. Given that, other demands on time have squeezed it out. That's too bad, because I'd really like to know more about it/know it better, and that's only going to happen if I use it.

The e-mail reminder is a Good Thing(tm), though -- even if I didn't follow up on the first of them this round.

Even a great essay can be begun excellently with a single good sentence; it might make for less discontinuous contribution-curves if the normal way to contribute included both a title and one-sentence response, followed by (a few layers of? depending on suggested length) more detailed thought... the first two entries could automatically be submitted, in case the rest never fully materialized.

Also, allowing some form of email-to-post response would make 30-second responses much easier.

We allow adhoc thread comments (like this one!).  We have slated for the next release support for adding thread comments via the rating page, but you can add them now by clicking on the title of the post you are rating and clicking on the 'add thread comment' link on the resulting page.

You're right -- we don't actively encourage adhoc commenting, b/c if we focus heavily on that mode, we become like every other threaded messaging system and lose many of the advantages of the rotisserie.

I can see where in some circumstances you might want to force more structure in replies -- a kind of thesis sentence and maybe bullet points to support it -- as Samuel Klein suggests. But I think the existing level of structure required by the Rotisserie in the main does what it is supposed to do.

Drive by posting rarely raises the level of discussion, so discouraging what Hal calls "ad hoc" threads is okay by me. And I've noted (somewhere else, but I'm too lazy to go find 'em) that passing posts along by e-mail dilutes the sense of place for the system, and that's not good.

See? I'm learning more about it already!