Email discussions have some advantages, such as the immediacy of having a folder on your computer with messages popping in all day long. This makes it an 'in-your-face' discussion, and probably results in a higher contribution rate, but it has some overhead (space and time requirements for message handling) due to the finer granularity of the information unit. It can be more economical for those who do not have flat-rate internet access and/or whose access number has a phone service cost.

The disadvantage is the fragmented and unstructured nature of the discussion 'threads' (they are not really threads since they are not linked). It is similar to the drawback of online chat when several conversations are going on at the same time (with no topic headers).

The email method becomes increasingly inefficient as the daily volume of discussant contribution increases beyond 50 to 100 or so. Most people do not have enough time to read that much email on a daily basis (unless it is part of a job assignment) much less respond to many items.

The Triple Nine discussion board at yahoogroups.com (http://www.yahoogroups.com ) has some advantages, since the messages are stored on a web server and can be browsed efficiently, with all messages in a uniform format and capable of including HTML such as links and images. However, the messages are separated into individual units, and although the messages can be viewed by thread (topic) or by date, it is still only possible to view one message at a time. This system has convenient functions such as a calendar, a database, a polling/voting function, links page, text chat, voice chat, etc. This free system has accumulated 50 million messages and 300,000 groups. eGroup contributions can be submitted by regular email or from a website page, and they are also delivered to your email program. This is an essential feature, and immediately makes this system superior to the low-tech listserv "store and forward" method of a mail server copying each incoming message to everyone on a distribution list.

Another alternative is the discussion board system LUSENET (www.greenspun.com/bboard/index.tcl) run at MIT by Phil Greenspun. I first came across this system as the host of a Y2K discussion. This type of discussion presentation is termed 'linear' because the discussion is presented as a one-dimensional sequence (or chain, thread, topic, discussion) of contributions (posts, messages, comments, answers), all on the same page (key benefit), as a series of paragraphs. Of course the message list is only presented this way, the initial discussion topic posts (the 'questions') plus all the follow up contributions for each question (the 'answers') are stored in a relational database. The initial view is a list of 'questions' or discussion topic headers (a short phrase describing the topic), and each is a link to a database call for a different thread. Each thread is a listing of the question followed by any number of answers in chronological order (as they are appended). This system has NO ads, and is fast to use.

The advantage of this system is that the entire thread is visible on a single page, and new contributions are appended at the end. This makes it very efficient to browse, skim, and reference prior messages. I find this to be a most important feature for keeping the discussion coherent. It is better to use the page-up/page-down keys (or with intellipoint, click, roll, and scroll) than having to click and load each message individually. Each discussion topic can be saved to a single file on your local computer if you want to archive it. Contributions can be entered in raw HTML for better formatting if needed. In this system pictures can be included only if they are available on line as an URL (in YahooGroups, they can be included inline as part of an email message). This system still gets my vote as the best, even though YahooGroups has more features.

There are many advantages to an online discussion board system. One is that the messages are collected, indexed, stored, and presented in a logical way regardless of the operational status of ones computer. Another is that if a person's email service is down or they are away from email for extended periods of time, they can still review and contribute to discussions when they are hosted primarily on a website such as YahooGroups and LUSENET. Discussion participants do not have to manage a flurry of email messages, which can be significant when people return from times out of town. People who cannot keep up on a daily basis with email traffic can more easily participate in discussions that are presented as a linear thread such as on LUSENET. This is a secondary advantage to discussions based on an online database.

Many discussion boards use a hierarchical structure. These boards are not very convenient to browse since you have to click on each post individually. The indented tree layout of the branching discussion board browsing interface becomes increasingly inappropriate and wasteful of bandwidth as the discussion gains each contribution over time. Displaying the topology of the discussion (the tree structure) is better off as an option, with the linear view the default.

The Intranets.com Discussion Board at www.intranets.com is a very good system. It has a modern interface and many capabilities as an office portal. It is much more than a discussion board system, it is collaborative groupware featuring these functions:

• Search
• Instant Messaging
• Discussion Board
• Calendar
• Members
• Documents
• Admin commands

Navigation:
The left vertical panel has an Outlook-like expandable task bar that controls which web page files or database results show up in the contents frame. The main taskbar includes the 7 areas referenced above.

Structure:
Very good design and organization. Professional appearance.

Loading:
This discussion board has one fatal flaw: the pages take to long to load and the have an automatic banner refresh from double-click which is annoying and can lead to lost work when the ads take the focus. The refresh is about 30 seconds and is time-consuming due to an unknown bottleneck. Additionally there may show up at times an error box referring to some failed Javascript. This is probably part of the banner loading and Intranets.com would be much better off without the doubleclick. I am going to try out a banner stripping plug-in to see if it works better.

EZBoard

The EZBoard Discussion Board at www.ezboard.com is a very good system. (See http://pub97.ezboard.com/bnuclearspace as an example).

Return to Links
Please send your comments... for more information:
email to jon@milesresearch.com.