|
|
|
|
jt512
Oct 23, 2008, 7:10 PM
Post #1 of 10
(3677 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
It is common in the Injuries & Accidents forum for threads about fatal accidents to contain an uncomfortable mixture of condolence messages and technical analysis of the accident. In this milieu technical posts can appear crass in light of the tragedy. This has an undesirable dampening effect on frank discussion of the analysis. Conversely, the intermingling of detailed accident analyses with condolences, aside from potentially being distressful to the victim's friends and family, dilutes the message of support being expressed by the climbing community. Furthermore, both purposes are harmed by frequent posts calling for the thread to be split.
It is important to realize that this admixture of condolences and technical posts occurs in spite of the existence of an "In Memory Of" forum specifically implemented for condolence messages. Why is this the case?
The reason that condolence messages and technical analyses get posted to the Injuries & Accidents forum is that both the forum's title and its intended scope encourage it. After all, a fatal accident is both a fatal injury and an accident. Consequently, initial posts in the forum often go something like this:
My friend X died on Saturday in a tragic climbing accident at crag Y. Details of the accident are not yet known, but it appears that anchor failure may have been a factor. We are deeply saddened by this tragic event. Condolences to his friends and family. ... And thus the original message seems to naturally invite both condolences and technical analysis.
In fact, analysis of accidents and the methods of preventing and treating injuries are completely separate subjects. The former is a technical climbing subject; the latter, a medical one. Combining them in a single forum makes little conceptual sense, and is perhaps a holdover from the early days of the website, when post volume was not high enough to justify separating the subjects. But that is no longer the case.
Therefore, I propose that the Injuries & Accidents forum be split into two forums with the following titles:
- Injury Treatment and Prevention
- Accident Analysis
Notice that, because of their specificity, neither of these titles implies that either forum is the place to start condolence threads or post condolence messages. Of course, this intent can be reinforced by appropriate wording in the forum description. Separating the subjects in this manner should help limit the scope of discussion in the Accident Analysis forum to technical matters, and make it natural for users to post condolences to the In Memory Of forum, where friends and family of victims can view them or make their own posts without having to view deconstructions of the tragedy.
Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Oct 23, 2008, 7:15 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Oct 23, 2008, 9:21 PM
Post #2 of 10
(3662 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
This makes a lot of sense.
The "Accident analysis" forum could be put next to "The Lab", these two forums being astute (is it the right word? I never used it before!).
I also think that a link to the "other" forum might be put (by the first poster if he thinks about it, or added by a Mod) in the OP. Example : link to the appropriate thread of the "In memory Of forum" in the OP of a thread in the Accident Analysis forum, if the accident was fatal of course and if there's a discussion about the daed climber.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Oct 24, 2008, 3:28 AM
Post #3 of 10
(3654 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
I think this is a good idea too. keeps things separate and creates a better environment in both places with the analysis and the condolences
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Oct 24, 2008, 6:16 PM
Post #4 of 10
(3632 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
I open to this idea. It seems to make a lot of sense. But I have a couple questions to pose, first. On first glance it doesn't appear to leave a place for condolences of those accident victims who didn't die. Occasionally, this includes people who are fairly seriously injured -- enough to warrant condolences. How do you see such sentiments fitting in?
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Oct 24, 2008, 6:23 PM
Post #5 of 10
(3628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Another thought that's only a little off the subject...
Currently, forums are grouped into larger piles -- climbing disciplines, etc. What are the community's thoughts about instead reorganizing all of them by the degree to which they're supposed to be moderated. For example, A&I (and new forums such as what we're currently discussing), Warriors Way, In Memory of, et al, would be in a "Moderated agressively" group. Trad, regional, blah, blah would be in a moderated (ummm) moderately pile. And stuff like soapbox would be in a "barely moderated" bucket.
This would also fit into a larger forum initiative I have rolling around in my head right now. (More on that within the next few weeks.)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Oct 24, 2008, 6:54 PM
Post #6 of 10
(3625 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
j_ung wrote: I open to this idea. It seems to make a lot of sense. But I have a couple questions to pose, first. On first glance it doesn't appear to leave a place for condolences of those accident victims who didn't die. Occasionally, this includes people who are fairly seriously injured -- enough to warrant condolences. How do you see such sentiments fitting in?
There's always "General" or "Community." Or you could have a "He's Not Dead Yet" forum. Then, if the victim succumbs to his injuries, a moderator could simply move the thread to "In Memory of." You could even program a button on the moderator's panel to do this with a single click, although I'd suggest that a confirmation dialogue be required to reduce the likelihood of premature reclassification.
Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Oct 24, 2008, 6:58 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Oct 24, 2008, 11:14 PM
Post #7 of 10
(3614 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
along the lines of the grouping.. i'd love to see a [-] on each forum i scroll past tons of stuff i never look at and could easily be closed down to each person's own interests. ie i don't and probably will never aid climb, don't ice climb, don't and can't slackline to save my life, i live in the N.East so i don't need the other local groups.. unless i plan on traveling.. then i can open those up accordingly.
i just think this would make a much more streamlined page
on the original topic.. I don't think people are as sensitive to accident cause discussion when the person survives the incident. The mix of "i'm glad you are ok!" and "get well!" could go along with the "how can we not do that again" stuff
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Oct 25, 2008, 6:24 AM
Post #9 of 10
(3604 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
j_ung wrote: Right now I'm fucking stuck in Charlotte (WHY CAN'T I ESCAPE THIS STINKING CITY?!), because I missed my connection from Boston. I'm gonna surf for fun for a change.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Nov 11, 2008, 7:00 PM
Post #10 of 10
(3515 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Alright, I've thought about this a bunch. I came up with a slightly different idea, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized how similar it was to the original, so we'll just go ahead and do it that way.
Thanks, Jay, for this feedback. You nailed what was a glaring deficiency... something that's been weighing heavily on me since you brought it up.
Stay tuned for more info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
