Forked from jackdouglas/Bring your own framework
Last active
December 24, 2015 02:39
-
-
Save cellio/6732161 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
**Bring your own framework** | |
We want a site that allows contributors to speak from within their framework. Overall, | |
this broadens the appeal of the site, and it preserves the richness of expression when | |
answers are given in the natural context of the one giving the answer, even if this | |
means expressing one's framework or opinions as unqualified facts. | |
Our aim is to be 'expert' in the context of the internet. This will not be the best | |
home for those who do not think deeply about the texts or those who cannot communicate | |
clearly and effectively. It is not our aim to be home only to academics or full-time | |
theologians: that would narrow the user-base too far and not be sustainable. | |
However we do not want a free-for-all (of course). The aim is primarily for our content | |
***to be useful***. This means that we must encourage content that is widely | |
comprehensible and we will do this by insisting that contributions must 'show their work'. | |
Exactly where and how we draw the line is an implementation detail and outside the | |
scope of this question, but suffice to say if answers get positive votes without showing | |
enough work then *action will be taken*. | |
Under this option is is generally OK to make statements directly, omitting qualifications such | |
as 'Christians believe…' or 'Jews believe…'. We would still encourage (but not require) | |
folk to support what they assert with reasoning or evidence: "don't just tell me | |
what is true, tell me *why* you think it's true". This is particularly crucial for statements | |
that are central to the main line of reasoning in the answer, and we can be a bit less strict | |
for breif tangents and interesting asides that help form the character and impression of an | |
answer. | |
This outcome is where we are currently heading. This is not a reason in itself for it to be | |
chosen, but it is of course the least risky option. It's clear our traffic is growing, and | |
although traffic can't be the only gauge of success on an expert site, it *is* necessary | |
for the site to be viable: | |
![Quantcast](http://i.stack.imgur.com/ET7KZ.png) | |
This is not about individuals. There is no outcome that will please everyone and we need to | |
recognise that whatever we choose will suit some and alienate others. This is not the aim of | |
course but we must pursue the best long-term goal for the site. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment