进行复杂讨论的最佳方式是什么?
The best way to have complex discussions?

原始链接: https://cq2.co/blog/the-best-way-to-have-complex-discussions

无论是在专业环境中还是在人工智能协调、公共政策等技术主题上,复杂的讨论通常会产生错综复杂的辩论。 这些对话期间遇到的主要挑战源于仓促反应和缺乏组织。 例如,面对面的讨论往往会产生即兴言论,并且难以维持秩序,因此在讨论多方面的话题时效果较差。 事实证明,解决脉冲响应特别具有挑战性。 虽然建议练习注意力和鼓励积极倾听,但这可能并不能保证在每种情况或团队中都能取得成功。 因此,首选的替代方案包括书面的异步对话格式,这在一定程度上减轻了冲动并鼓励在做出回应之前进行彻底的考虑。 然而,这些方法也面临着详细交互结构不足的障碍。 Slack 和 Discourse 等平台是复杂讨论的热门选择,但在提供足够的组织方面提供的帮助有限。 由于单个线程中断开的对话和重复的评论,异步交换变得势不可挡。 为了解决这一困境,研究人员和开发人员开始创建专门用于管理复杂会谈的工具。 CQ2 就是这样一个项目——一个专为结构化对话而设计的创新开源平台。 CQ2 通过有组织的树和更清晰的线程提供更整洁的体验,最大限度地减少引用地狱并确保集中关注相关信息。 借助嵌套线程等功能,保持讨论的重点和上下文的合理性变得更加简单。 CQ2 只是在我们日益互联的世界中优化协作沟通、促进更深入的理解和提高整体效率的充满希望的旅程的开始。

很棒的讨论! 看到历史上不同的沟通工具和平台分享的各种观点和经验是很有趣的。 从您的描述来看,c2q 的目标似乎是提供一种更有组织性且易于访问的方式来促进复杂的讨论。 以下是我对该工具的某些方面的想法: 首先,对精确语言和详细分析的要求可能使 c2q 对从事冗长、细致入微的辩论的学者、研究人员或专业人士有吸引力。 它强调突出文本的关键部分并保持清晰的思想层次,这可能会鼓励更加有意和细致的对话。 然而,您提到 c2q 密集的 UI 可能不会吸引那些在讨论中投入较少或主要通过移动设备参与的用户。 移动优化可以被视为一个优先事项,以扩大其可访问性和易用性,以供更多受众使用。 此外,允许替代显示模式或配置可以满足不同的用户偏好和屏幕尺寸。 另一个考虑因素可能是合并有助于更快导航和发现相关线程的功能,也许利用基于先前交互建议相关讨论或推荐阅读的算法。 最后,有趣的是,c2q 的架构强调了策展和组织的重要性,这提出了系统计划如何在丰富的内容池中管理和呈现高质量讨论的问题。 考虑实现使用户能够标记、评分或推荐讨论的功能,使策展人能够向用户展示和展示最引人注目和信息丰富的对话,从而培养一个由参与和知情的个人组成的社区。 总的来说,我认为 c2q 在创建一个强大的协作平台以进行深入讨论方面具有令人兴奋的潜力,使用户能够深入研究复杂的主题并进行严格的知识交流。 不断探索、迭代并分享您的进展——我将热切期待该项目的发展!
相关文章

原文

We love complex, deep discussions.

We've seen or been part of many discussions — strategic discussions at work, discussions on AI alignment, technical design documents, public policy, etc. For us, the most frustrating issues with discussions are: impulsive responses and lack of structure.

The default way of discussions — in-person ones — are highly susceptible to impulsive responses and are extremely hard to provide a good structure for, making them the worst for complex topics.

The first issue of impulsive responses is a hard nut to crack. Practising and advocating for active listening is the ideal solution but it's not guaranteed to work every time and in every team. That's why we prefer written, async discussions over in-person ones for complex topics — they help prevent impulsive responses to an extent (and even more with features like slow mode) and promote thoughtful responses. But the second issue still remains — written, async discussions lack structure too. If you've used chat/forum platforms like Slack and Discourse for complex discussions, you know how hard it is to follow comments there.

DiscourseIn Discourse, discussions are a stream of unorganised comments. This way of discussion — where people talk over one another and topics get mixed up — doesn't work for deep dives into complex and lengthy topics. For such topics, the discussion needs to be carefully written and organised.

There's no concept of “where” you are in Discourse discussions. There's only “when” you are, since the comments are ordered only by time. Discourse does provide some organisation to see the replies to a comment at one place. However if you need to see the replies to a particular reply inside a comment, you need to scroll down through other comments, find that particular reply (repeated as a comment!) and then check its replies:

SlackSlack is not really built for written, async discussions, but since it's widely used, let's talk about it. Discussions there are a stream of unorganised comments too, but at least Slack has threads to discuss a particular comment in detail in a separate pane. However, if you want to discuss a comment inside a thread in detail (i.e., create a new thread from a thread), you can't — Slack allows only one level of threads. Moreover, Slack feels too chatty — it feels impossible to have a long-running async discussion there. Its UI encourages sending bursts of fast, short comments instead of well-formed thoughts, and the typing indicator keeps everyone else distracted while one person tries to form their idea.

Quote hellNow behold the common annoyance in all chat/forum platforms — the quote hell. What's that? Let's say Ava puts a comment about something. Then Caleb puts a comment with his replies to some quotes from Ava's comment. Now Ava puts a comment with her replies to Caleb's replies in quotes. What's happening? Replies to a topic are spread across different comments and you're forced to mentally manage all those quotes and their replies! On top of that, there are unrelated comments between that break your flow. These problems might not seem big for a discussion between two people, but a complex and lengthy discussion with 5+ participants quickly turns into a huge mess. Here's what a quote hell looks like:

After being frustrated with Slack, Discourse, etc., we started searching for a tool specifically built for complex discussions. We found none, began exploring how such a tool would work and look like, and started building:

CQ2It's a free and open source tool for complex discussions. It's in its early stages, but it's the start of something that we think will both make discussions immensely enjoyable and radically increase productivity. We simulated a small discussion from LessWrong on CQ2. Check it out on the live demo, here! It turned out to be much better organised and easier to follow.

In CQ2, there's no mess of unorganised comments — create threads inside threads so that each thread stays on topic and organised. Forget quote hell — create threads around specific quotes and find all replies related to a topic at one place. Never lose context of where you are — see all parent threads of the current thread in the same view. Focus on what matters — see which threads have unread comments, which are concluded and quickly go to a particular thread using CQ2's tree. Conclude threads — add conclusions to resolved threads and to the whole discussion once it's resolved.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com