Expanding Rand Paul Forum - seeking input

[jct74]

As Rand's campaign heats up in the coming months it might be a good idea to add some more forums to accomodate the increased amount of activity and group similar topics together. Recently when Rand announced his candidacy the Rand Paul Forum became very congested and threads were getting pushed down off the first page very quickly. Splitting up Rand's main forum would prevent this from happening and allow people to find items they are looking for more easily. Of course, splitting up has drawbacks and sometimes can be more bad than good. So maybe the best course of action would be not to split up Rand's main forum at all, at least for a while.

Some categories of Rand Paul threads are:

-news articles/editorials
-interviews
-speeches
-general discussion posts (original OP's about various topics, such as Rand's campaign strategy for example)
-activism

What other categories are there? There would probably not be a forum for each of these categories individually, but some of the categories could be combined to fit under one forum. For example, news articles/editorials, interviews, and speeches could maybe all go into a forum called News & Media. That would be by far the most active forum as there is a lot of those posts. What to do then with the general discussion and activism posts? Combine them into one one forum -or- should they each have their own forum? Or throw the general discussion posts in with News & Media and have activism as the only other forum? What do you think would be a good way to split up? Or should it not be split up at all? Tags and/or thread prefixes could also fit into the equation, although I personally do not care much for thread prefixes.

[wcasino]

Can we take away any lessons learned form dailypaul maybe? I'm not a web content guru, but I'm certain that there were growing pains there in 08 and 12 that we could learn from.

Remember, freedom isn't free.

[Okaloosa]

Sub-Forum ideas

State Forums just for Rand Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina

Issue based activism/outreach
National Defense/Foreign Policy
Independent/Youth (non-traditional republican outreach)
Social Conservative Outreach
Senior Outreach


Fundraising/Moneybombs
Supporting the campaign's official volunteer efforts
Get Out the Vote GOTV (Planning, strategies, and techniques)
Letters to the editor
Social Media

[eleganz]

Sub-Forum ideas

State Forums just for Rand Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina


Fundraising/Moneybombs
Supporting the campaign's official volunteer efforts
Get Out the Vote GOTV (Planning, strategies, and techniques)
Letters to the editor
Social Media

In my opinion and from my own experience, I don't like to visit many sub-forums, I think we should only create sub-forums out of necessity and I would break it down like this:

News/Media/Videos
Polls
Rand headlines
Rand videos official and grassroots

Grassroots Activism
a place for those that want to do something effective
phone from home
social media campaigns


Opposition research and news


Lastly, a sub-forum for

speculation & gossip
Who should be Rand's VP, Cabinet, Ambassador, secret service, and so on~
Why isn't Rand combing his hair or why is Rand's suit not fitting well
Who should endorse Rand Paul
What 2016 means for the liberty movement
Why Gary Johnson is a Rand sour puss
etc...

[The Northbreather]

Maybe a sub that is a resource/ archive of all Rands known historical accomplishments, votes and positions.

It would be IMHO be a great resource to all the bloggers, keyboard warriors, and debaters to have this type of thing in one spot that one could cut and paste from.

[IndianaPolitico]

I would suggest to not go crazy with adding sub forums. Stuff can get lost in the myriad of forums and topics. However I would like to see the speculation and gossip moved to its own category.

[RonZeplin]

Need a troll outreach sub-forum for the inevitable neocon progressive spinmiesters.

[r3volution 3.0]

News From the Campaign - Rand's op-eds, press releases, videos of speeches, etc

Media Coverage - self-explanatory
-polls
-friendly
-hostile (should be member only like the current Spin, Chafe, and Flack)

Online Polls - may seem silly to give this it's own subforum, but it would really help to have them all grouped in one place for easy voting

Activism - both grassroots and calls for helping the official campaign

Rand on the Issues - not a forum but rather a permanent document (editable by Mods, with input from users) citing all of his important votes, policy statements, etc; the idea being to condense this information for the benefit of bloggers, etc

Peanut Gallery - for original commentary about the campaign (member only)

[William Tell]

Is there any demand for a members only Rand strategy/whatever sub-forum? There have been a few times I wish we had a private forum in addition to the spin chaff flak forum. If no one else wants one there's no point setting it up though. Just throwing that out there.

[r3volution 3.0]

Is there any demand for a members only Rand strategy/whatever sub-forum? There have been a few times I wish we had a private forum in addition to the spin chaff flak forum. If no one else wants one there's no point setting it up though. Just throwing that out there.

Agreed

Peanut Gallery - for original commentary about the campaign (member only)

[eleganz]

Is there any demand for a members only Rand strategy/whatever sub-forum? There have been a few times I wish we had a private forum in addition to the spin chaff flak forum. If no one else wants one there's no point setting it up though. Just throwing that out there.

Good point! I would participate in this forum, I do honestly believe there are some things better left unsaid in the public light. I would never discuss actual strategy on the forum but a private one would be nice!

[orenbus]

I'd be hesitant in doing more subforums at least until traffic picks up drastically. The concern is having good intentions of pushing certain categories out on their own and if those end up being more popular ones (the trash gossip) then the not so popular (and some would say more important) activism threads that should get views don't end up going anywhere because no one knows that they are happening, since more people are interested in reading gossip.

Echoes from the past: (11/11/11 Support The Troops MB)

I think giving the moneybomb it's own subforum has actually made it less productive. No one really checks that forum. When the promotion thread was constantly being bumped up to the top of the grassroots forum, it was impossible to ignore.

I made a video and posted it in the other subforum, but it is crickets over there.

Didn't we use prefixes in 2012? I'm wondering what the argument would be against using them? Perhaps we can have both the general Rand discussion forum like we have now, and allow thread creators to assign a prefix from a drop down menu of categories and have those threads with reference links redirecting them in the specific subforums to the actual thread so that they are in both places (general and sub). For those that want to look at certain category of threads for organizational purposes they can, for those that want to see everything in one view (which will be most people) they can. This way important threads that should get eyeballs can continue to through bumps in the general forum, i'm thinking activism threads as opposed to gossip garbage (that unfortunately generates more traffic).

The good intentions of trying to get the more "important" topics their own subforum thinking people will want to traffic it more, may end up doing the exact opposite and hurting those efforts. I said this during the 2012 campaign and I'm sure to this day it will still hold true;

Many people on forums like to b.s. and brainstorm. Less people like to roll up their sleeves and do actual work.

It's an unfortunate reality on all internet activist message boards, people like to be entertained with the latest trash news and/or throw in their two cents (by being armchair generals), but when it comes time for them to really do something and the metal meets the meat they are the first out the door. Don't penalize those that want to do actual activism by having their threads get less eyeballs and less opportunities to recruit others that will volunteer to help them (and mean it) and not just say they will.

Also if it's an issue of new and returning users losing track of the threads they created because they got pushed off (and it's not obvious to them they can subscribe to a thread) then perhaps that can be addressed differently on the page. New features might be added that they see (Your latest threads, Threads your Quoted in, Reply to Your posts) as opposed to addressing it with subforums/categories.

[Bastiat's The Law]

No more sub-forums.

[Okaloosa]

Ron Paul Forums had tons of sub forums election season for Ron and I think they keep topics organized. One general forum will have boring yet actually helpful topics that will get overwhelmed by gossip posts that get tons of replies.

[orenbus]

Is there any demand for a members only Rand strategy/whatever sub-forum? There have been a few times I wish we had a private forum in addition to the spin chaff flak forum. If no one else wants one there's no point setting it up though. Just throwing that out there.

Yea this one might be an okay exception not sure though, I've also had a moment or two where I wanted to discuss some things or get feedback but didn't necessarily want it indexed on google for the world to see from a simple search. I suppose that would be the main benefit, not having certain discussions be indexed by search engines.

The one issue I can see right away with having a subforum like this is people may get a false sense of security since info there would still be accessible to anyone that is really interesting in looking. For example someone thinks its a secure place and shares some sensitive inside info. about what the official campaign or grassroots is going to do (on any number of things such as attacks, defenses, promotions, etc.) allowing opposition to prepare or MSM to cover early making effectiveness less, ideally information like this wouldn't leak, but you never know. We know the media is reading these threads based on their own reports we've read referencing RPF and have to safely assume people in the opposing campaigns or their supporters are doing the same.

On the other hand talking tactics in public may be okay, in some ways it be beneficial for example if a thread is really hot with interaction and we actually want the media to cover it. Talking strategy is another ball of wax, there is a difference between tactics and strategy.

Perhaps what is needed instead is "private groups" functionality on forums, where a group can be established by any member and other specific trusted members be invited and approved for more sensitive discussion. I know vbulletin has "social groups" addon, I've used these in the past on other forums and they work pretty good. This way people can brainstorm or speak somewhat freely without unknown eyes looking over their shoulder, then when the group has something to share publicly they can do so in general.

Example of social groups vbulletin addon:

[CPUd]

No subforums, utilize the tagging system, and let members add their own tags to a thread. Each thread would have a limit of N tags.

[nayjevin]

Yea this one might be an okay exception not sure though, I've also had a moment or two where I wanted to discuss some things or get feedback but didn't necessarily want it indexed on google for the world to see from a simple search. I suppose that would be the main benefit, not having certain discussions be indexed by search engines.

The one issue I can see right away with having a subforum like this is people may get a false sense of security since info there would still be accessible to anyone that is really interesting in looking. For example someone thinks its a secure place and shares some sensitive inside info. about what the official campaign or grassroots is going to do (on any number of things such as attacks, defenses, promotions, etc.) allowing opposition to prepare or MSM to cover early making effectiveness less, ideally information like this wouldn't leak, but you never know. We know the media is reading these threads based on their own reports we've read referencing RPF and have to safely assume people in the opposing campaigns or their supporters are doing the same.

On the other hand talking tactics in public may be okay, in some ways it be beneficial for example if a thread is really hot with interaction and we actually want the media to cover it. Talking strategy is another ball of wax, there is a difference between tactics and strategy.

Perhaps what is needed instead is "private groups" functionality on forums, where a group can be established by any member and other specific trusted members be invited and approved for more sensitive discussion. I know vbulletin has "social groups" addon, I've used these in the past on other forums and they work pretty good. This way people can brainstorm or speak somewhat freely without unknown eyes looking over their shoulder, then when the group has something to share publicly they can do so in general.

I don't think that's much of an issue but if it is the best security is not to centralize it to this forum but develop other ways of organizing/communicating on an individual basis.

[WD-NY]

Is there any demand for a members only Rand strategy/whatever sub-forum? There have been a few times I wish we had a private forum in addition to the spin chaff flak forum. If no one else wants one there's no point setting it up though. Just throwing that out there.

This x 10000! (only, I don't think it needs to necessarily be private -- but there definitely needs to be a sticky-thread that centralizes tactical ideas, suggestions, and strategies from RPF members for both Rand's online and offline ops teams... or better yet, a page that presents our current top ideas/suggestions/creations so that the campaign can quickly check-in and see what we most want them to know about/be made aware of).

More ideally, RPF should have a formal representative/liaison between us and Rand's digital team (Vincent Harris) whose job it is to brief them weekly (and/or immediately whenever necessary) on the best ideas, suggestions, recommendations, and/or work-product (re: epic youtube videos, gifs, memes, etc.) made by RPF members since the last brief was submitted.

They say they want to "crowdsource" the campaign ... that's my idea for how to efficiently + effectively do so

So many Rand supporters are seriously skilled web devs, digital marketers, designers, video editors/producers, etc. -- it would be a huge advantage for them to make them feel like their ideas/work might actually have a chance at being picked up and used/shared/implemented by the campaign.

[orenbus]

I don't think that's much of an issue but if it is the best security is not to centralize it to this forum but develop other ways of organizing/communicating on an individual basis.

Yea I agree in regards to security, in regards to communicating info someone may not necessarily want to discuss in the open, but with other forum members idk. For example (not sure if this is still the case) but back in 2012 we had to send out multiple PMs through forums with a 5 member limit addressed in the "to" field at a time. So say you had a group of 15 that would be three separate PM threads you would have to track and keep everyone filled in by copying and resending messages to the other two groups. We eventually just switched to emails, but for convenience social groups would make things easier as an all in one and part of forums, also some people don't like sharing out their personal email addresses or check them regularly, but still want to be included in the discussion.

[bubbleboy]

I think a forum would be quite nice entitled "Rand Paul is NOT his father!"
Hey thanks,

[William Tell]

I remember there was an online poll we were focusing on winning last year. That's the sort of thing I'm thinking off. We did it through PM's to keep our strategy off the public net. It would have been simpler some other way than individual PM's.

[specialkornflake]

I don't like sub-forums. I've only every really looked at a few forums on this site. First, I think it was Ron Paul Grassroots, then it was General Politics, then it's now this Rand Paul forum.

[orenbus]

I don't like sub-forums. I've only every really looked at a few forums on this site. First, I think it was Ron Paul Grassroots, then it was General Politics, then it's now this Rand Paul forum.

Yep, that is going to be an example of most of the users and new users on RPF. Thanks for sharing that, +Rep.

[afwjam]

agreed

[orenbus]

One general forum will have boring yet actually helpful topics that will get overwhelmed by gossip posts that get tons of replies.

I agree it's a struggle against the mass noise, but at least those threads will have a fighting chance if the posters and few others involved are committed to keeping it up. The alternative is they get cast out into the wilderness where some may go but most users won't.

For some reason the whole scenario reminds me of this scene.

[orenbus]

//

[GunnyFreedom]

Maybe add policy tags throughout so discussions on "Policy X" will be easy to find.

Foreign Policy
Domestic Policy
Monetary Policy
Drug Policy
Abortion Policy
etc

and then push up some controls where it's easy from Rand's Home Page to click on a tag, or a policy and see a list of those articles.

[GunnyFreedom]

This x 10000! (only, I don't think it needs to necessarily be private -- but there definitely needs to be a sticky-thread that centralizes tactical ideas, suggestions, and strategies from RPF members for both Rand's online and offline ops teams... or better yet, a page that presents our current top ideas/suggestions/creations so that the campaign can quickly check-in and see what we most want them to know about/be made aware of).

More ideally, RPF should have a formal representative/liaison between us and Rand's digital team (Vincent Harris) whose job it is to brief them weekly (and/or immediately whenever necessary) on the best ideas, suggestions, recommendations, and/or work-product (re: epic youtube videos, gifs, memes, etc.) made by RPF members since the last brief was submitted.

They say they want to "crowdsource" the campaign ... that's my idea for how to efficiently + effectively do so

So many Rand supporters are seriously skilled web devs, digital marketers, designers, video editors/producers, etc. -- it would be a huge advantage for them to make them feel like their ideas/work might actually have a chance at being picked up and used/shared/implemented by the campaign.

A cloister for RandBadgers only lol. I like it.

[GunnyFreedom]

If I'm a complete stranger and I don't know this guy, I come here, and what I want to see is "where does he stand on [my pet issue]."

So if every thread impacting gun policy was tagged gun policy, I am thinking you can put buttons or menus on the front page to just scroll down click whatever policy you want and read it.

For it to work, you will kind of have to point neon signs to the thing, it's out of normal so random visitors may not know what it is. Or a reframe. "Discussions categorized by policy positions, click here"

and that just goes to your tag system. No subforums. Or across several subforums. Even better, I like the subforum plan you already have, but add the tags on top of that, and a user clicking for tags will get articles from all of Rand's subforums. That way you have both organized for browsing AND easier for users to find.

[ghengisconrad]

Video subforum.

Maybe even make it so everything with youtube or /video/ url in the url of the OP gets directly copied or collected there.

I have kind of a routine of watching news videos while drinking my morning coffee. This would change my life.

Thing is, I don't wanna miss a thing. Not one new Rand Paul video; so I comb through all the front page threads to "make sure" i have them.

I wouldn't have to do that if I could trust something to collect the videos.