* Knowledge Base Links to Forums

[tatewise]

Following on from Common interests / research (12179) there is no problem with recommending other genealogy forums.
In fact two of the three mentioned there are listed in the fhugdownloads:forums|> Downloads and Links ~ Forums and anyone is welcome to add other relevant forums.

[ColeValleyGirl]

Mike, http://genealogy.stackexchange.com/ is not a forum so doesn't belong on that page -- would you prefer a new category for Q&A sites, or shall I change the title of the forums page?

[tatewise]

It looks close enough to the concept of a Forum to simply be included under Forums.
You could elaborate the Description a little to clarify that Q&A sites are included.
Each question has multiple answers just like our postings, but they are categorised under multiple Keywords instead of in dedicated Forums.
Why do you say it is not a Forum?

[ColeValleyGirl]

Stack Exchange encourages specific questions that have a specific, canonical answers. A question is asked and respondents weigh in with a carefully-thought-out response which is then vetted through voting and wiki-editing (improving on the answer).

The key difference is that each answer posted has to stand on its own. Stack Exchange neither supports nor encourages a "forum-style" of open, free-for-all discussion (many-to-many conversations). This is by design.

From http://meta.stackexchange.com/q/92107 which applies to all Stackexchange sites.

http://meta.genealogy.stackexchange.com/q/1939/104 also is worth reading.

[tatewise]

That first link is somewhat less clear about whether users think Stack Exchange is Forum-like or not.

In many senses the FHUG Forums are not Forums in the way Stack Exchange represents them.

We are more Q&A focussed than many, and I at least try and stop threads running off topic by splitting them, as I have with this one.

I do get that Stack Exchange has a particular way of handling its postings, and voting on answers is a novel technique, but in the genealogy domain where Forums are probably more focussed is it really that different?

If you feel strongly enough then change the KB title to perhaps Forums and Q&A Sites and explain the difference in the Description. However, it would be as well to keep the page tag keyword as Forum.

[jmurphy]

I do get that Stack Exchange has a particular way of handling its postings, and voting on answers is a novel technique, but in the genealogy domain where Forums are probably more focussed is it really that different?

Mike --

Apologies for the very tardy reply to your question from earlier this year -- I had been planning to weigh in on this discussion, and my computer went out, so I spent several weeks poking around trying to fix it -- after which I had forgotten to come back and contribute to this thread.

In the meantime, I've had that much more experience with G&FH.SE, having taken over moderator pro tem duties after ColeValleyGirl stepped down.

So I can answer with an unqualified YES. Stack Exchange really is that different.

The expectation in a forum is that people discuss things. The expectation on Stack Exchange is that someone asks a question, and others answer the question, in discrete, separate bits.

Here on FHUG or on the Mailing list, someone asks a question, and very often you are the one to step up and kindly guide the person to a resolution of their problem. There is a natural give-and-take, back-and-forth conversation that happens -- and if others come in later with the same problem, they often 'bump the thread' on the forum by posting "I'm having this problem too".

Notice however that you often steer new users towards the Knowledge Base, where there are Q/As relating to moving FH to a new machine, etc. so you don't have to post the same answers in the forum over and over and over again.

Stack Exchange's philosophy is that the sites, by means of the Q/As, are creating a Knowledge Base. There may be 'discussion' on a SE Question while it is being worked on, but requests for clarification or more information are made in comments on specific posts, not just added to the end of a thread -- the new information solicited by means of the comments are supposed to be incorporated into the Qs or As, and after a certain amount of time, the comments are erased because they are obsolete, leaving the clean Q/A.

We have a real problem now with many of the new users coming over to SE from forums, where they are used to posting "me too" additions to old threads, taking on comments as answers to existing questions, instead of asking new questions.

There is ample precedent for query sites in genealogy -- for example, my favorite UK site is Curious Fox. No back-and-forth discussion happens there -- users post queries, and others send answers to the members' mailboxes. It isn't a discussion forum, and if someone were to list it as a forum, I would object for the same reasons.

Each kind of site -- whether a forum, a wiki, a query message board, a Q/A site, a mailing list archive -- has its own value -- all have different strengths and weaknesses. But when you try to do the work of one site on a platform that is designed for another, you get a mess, as I discovered yesterday while attending a live chat on Facebook.

I don't know how many of the users on FHUG will find G&FH.SE via the link, but I for one would appreciate some kind of description that would not set up the expectation there is a discussion forum at the other end.

[tatewise]

I have tried to encompass a wider range of genealogy advisory services by amending the wording on the following KB pages:
fhugdownloads:index&#utilities_and_services|> Downloads and Links ~ Utilities and Services
i.e. "Forums & Q/A Sites offering advice on genealogy topics"
fhugdownloads:forums|> Downloads and Links ~ Forums & Q/A Sites
fhugdownloads:contents:service_stackexchange_genealogy_family_history|> Service ~ StackExchange Genealogy & Family History
This last page will become listed in the page above when Jane next updates the cross-references.

Feel free to change the wording further. That is how the FHUG KB Wiki works. Anyone can change it.
Don't worry if it all goes awry, as the Moderators can restore any earlier version from the automatic archive.