Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

🔄 SW Group & Category Re-Structuring (Feedback Appreciated) 📩

[b]Hello SW Members! :)

We are looking forward to Re-Structuring our Group and Category format, as well as improving the list of Topics that will be available to post in, on Similar Worlds.[/b]

To be able to launch Similar Worlds and develop many of the urgently needed features in a timely manner, we imported mostly all of the Groups (as is) that were already available on Experience Project.

We also needed time to familiarize ourselves with the members here, their likes, dislikes, interests, habits, etc…

Now that we have a much better understanding of our audience, [b]we would like to soon proceed with the re-structuring and consolidation of our many Group and Category topics that are available for members to post in.[/b]

[sep]

[b]A major problem we recognized with the original EP group structuring, was lack of relevance or inter-linking between topics, as well as redundancy.[/b]

For example:
If one types "Animals" in the Group search box, here are some of the results that may currently appear:

[quote]• I Love Animals
• I Love Animal Animals
• I Love Animals Also People That Loves Animal
• I Love Animals On All Farm, Nature Animals, and Out Door Life

…

• I Hate It When People Feed Animals To Other Animals
• I Hate Animals Abusers Alot Because Im A Animal Lover
• I Im An Animal Lover And Hate Cruelty To Animals
• I Love Animals And I Am Against Animal Cruelty[/quote]

As we can see, there are two major issues here:

1) Redundancy between groups. That many groups are not needed, when many are repeating the exact same topic/title, with only minor changes to wording.

2) These similar groups are not inter-linked/inter-related.

This means that two persons could each join one of these two groups:
[i]• I Love Animals
• I Love Animals Also People That Loves Animal[/i]
… and have no connection/relevance to each other whatsoever.
They would not be able to as easily find related posts or questions without joining EACH of the very many duplicate groups about the same topic.

This is not well organized at all. It makes the site confusing and less relevant when it comes to the posts appearing in feeds, recommendations, searches, etc…

[b]To resolve the two problems highlighted above, we would like to "Consolidate" all SW Groups, whereby [u]we will be merging relevant groups, as well as trimming out groups[/u] that have no relevance or interest in being on Similar Worlds.

We will also be working on a feature which allows members to submit/suggest new topic category suggestions.[/b]

[sep]

[c=#004A59][big]Groups? Categories? Topics?[/big][/c]

At this time, we are considering to reduce the separation between "Stories" and "Questions" on Similar Worlds.

Stories and Questions will indeed remain as separate features each having their own feed.
However, they will be more similar in format and options, as well as Topic (Group/Category) selection.

(For example, at the moment, you can only attach Polls to Questions, however, you will be able to do the same on Stories, if/when this change is implemented)

During the post creation process, the user will be able to select whether the new post will be marked as a Story or a Question (and it will appear in the appropriate feeds).

At the moment, on Similar Worlds.

[b]Groups => Stories

Categories => Questions
[/b]

We find that this adds to the "redundancy" and "lack of relevance" issues, as explained before with duplicate groups.

For example,
Currently there is both:
a) A Group called "I Love Animals On All Farm, Nature Animals, and Out Door Life"

b) A Category Called: Life > Pets, Animals and Nature

These "Topics" are currently not connected algorithmically in any way, on SW.

Therefore, joining the category "Pets, Animals and Nature" doesn't help in any way to see stories about Animals, Nature, etc…

[b]To improve this, and also improve the user experience, we would like to merge the selection of Group and Categories under one umbrella called "Topics".

In this way, you can much more easily select what type of Stories and Questions you are interested (or not interested) in seeing on SW, and they will finally be relevantly filtered per your preferences.[/b]

[sep]

[c=#004A59][big]Example of SW Topics Structure[/big][/c]

I will attempt to draft an example below on how the proposed Topics structure may look like.

[c=#BF0000]Please Note that these examples being used below:

[b]1) Do NOT in any way suggest our endorsement, approval or opinion on any of these topics.

2) Are being used because I feel they are easier examples to understand/relate to (being polarizing topics).

3) Are topics/ideas people discuss in real life, and has no indication on what is True or False, Good or Bad. We are a platform for sharing opinions and experiences. regardless how incorrect, inaccurate or false an opinion may seem.[/b][/c]

Our aim is to create a HUGE "Tree" like structure of all relevant topics of discussion.
They will branch from "Parent" Topics/Categories, down to more specific Topics.

This will help greatly for organization, relevance and filtering.

Examples:

[quote]Identity -> Politics -> Democracy - > News & Events
Identity -> Politics -> Democracy - > Politicians
Identity -> Politics -> Democracy - > Ideology
Identity -> Religion -> Democracy -> Terrorism
…

Identity -> Politics -> Republic - > News & Events
Identity -> Politics -> Republic - > Politicians
Identity -> Politics -> Republic - > Ideology
Identity -> Religion -> Republic-> Terrorism
…

Identity -> Religion -> Islam -> Praying
Identity -> Religion -> Islam -> Quran
Identity -> Religion -> Islam -> Fasting
Identity -> Religion -> Islam -> Terrorism
…

Identity -> Religion -> Christianity -> Catholicism
Identity -> Religion -> Christianity -> God
Identity -> Religion -> Christianity -> Satan
Identity -> Religion -> Christianity -> Terrorism
Identity -> Religion -> Christianity -> Homosexuality
…

Relationship -> Homosexuality -> Dating
Relationship -> Homosexuality -> Marriage
Relationship -> Homosexuality -> Divorce
Relationship -> Homosexuality -> Affairs
Relationship -> Homosexuality -> Legality
…[/quote]

As is observable all across the internet, such conflicting topics do appear very often on Similar Worlds as well.
People will have different opinions, points and things to say about varying topics.

[b]Our hope is to better categorized these posts, so that they can be shared between the correct (relevant) audiences.

Conversely, we can use such groups as filters also, whereby users don't have to see posts about certain topics they dislike.[/b]

For example, if you are tired of seeing "posts about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton", and no longer wish to see those posts on SW.

[b]You will easily be able to filter (block) topically:[/b]

Identity -> Politics -> Democracy - > Politicians
&
Identity -> Politics -> Republic - > Politicians

or simply:

Identity -> Politics -> * - > Politicians

If feasible also, we will allow block filters by specific Keywords as well, such as "Trump", "Diaper", "ISIS", etc…

[sep]

[b]Another dimension we would like to add to these SW Topics, is your "Stance/Preference" on each Topic.
This can also act as a filter as well.[/b]

[big][c=#005E2F]Like[/c], [c=#665D00]Opinion[/c] (Neutral), [c=#800000]Dislike[/c][/big] - Something along these lines

For example, someone can
[c=#005E2F][b]Like:[/b][/c] Identity -> Religion -> Islam -> Quran
[c=#665D00][b]Opinion:[/b][/c] Identity -> Religion -> Islam -> Quran
[c=#800000][b]Dislike:[/b][/c] Identity -> Religion -> Islam -> Quran

For the topic Titles, we are planning to allow them to be flexible, as Question Titles are at the moment.

However, the linked topic or sub-title may appear as: [b][u]I have an Opinion about the Quran[/u][/b]

[sep]

There is still much to discuss and share with everyone, still more planning to be done (the topics are still to be chosen, so those examples are not necessarily official yet).

As I discussed a lot of new things already, I'll pause for now, and give a chance to members to provide some feedback and suggestions.

Features such as the "Like, Opinion, Dislike" need to be thought out very well in order to be seamless with the site, user-friendly, and not too confusing/complex.
We have some ideas on how this and the other features could be implemented, but more planning is still to be done.

Thanks for your attention and support!
[c=#005E2F][i]-The SW Team[/i][/c]

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

1-50 of 62

candycane · 31-35, F

I have my own groups i made from e p what will happen to those they are my own personal poems and stories

JustNik · 51-55, F

Good gravy. Stock up on aspirin first. This looks like a headache waiting to happen. LOL Appreciate the effort and good luck! 👍

View 1 more replies »

Fungirlmmm · 51-55, F

@JustNik I was going down the same path. One of the EP admins told me to merge all the redundant groups would take over a year for 3 full time developers and that was why they basically abandoned merging the groups. Then they ran into folks who complained that a group was deleted because it didn't say exactly what they wanted anymore for their post. And they messed up and lost some people posts in the merged groups. Lol good luck

Andrew · Admin

@Fungirlmmm thanks for the feedback.
Yes it will take quite a bit of work to have this change released on SW, however, we don't expect it to take us a year from now.

We are very efficient and experienced at what we do. To get this SW website to the state that it is at now was a much more challenging task.

I believe we'll be able to accomplish this change, but like with anything, it make take some tweaking/improvements after the initial release.

As long as it is something that will improve SW in the long run, it's something we are willing to work towards.

Repete · 61-69, M

@Andrew like many things that changes its hard work on your part and thank you for it . It usually is for the better but it also takes some getting use to . That's where the aspirin comes in . Lol again thanks for all you have done and for what you are doing now.👍

SW-User

I wonder how you'll address the problem of people not caring where they post: e.g. Discussing pizza under spirituality.

View 10 more replies »

beckyromero · 36-40, F

@Andrew [quote]we would have to make things as algorithmically intelligent and/or automated as possible.[/quote]

Please be aware of how that has gotten Facebook into trouble.

EDIT:
(Just saying: be careful in how you approach this.)

BatRinseRepeat · 31-35, F

@beckyromero

What she said ☝

amethyst1 · 36-40, F

@Andrew Sometimes on EP, I think things were moved (or removed) without the original poster of the content being informed. If you do implement this, I would hope we would be informed where it has been moved to etc. Although personally I would not post things in an irrelevant group anyway.

SStarfish ·

Eh i personally am unconcerned with redundant group types and am more concerned with grossly inappropriate groups. Like today i ran across a dude posting how he wanted to live out his rape fantasies.

It's groups like that that need to be elimanated and sorted out of the site completely.

We don't need gross inappropriate offensively vile type content. Imo there's many groups that need to be taken out completely. Disgustingly offensive stuff that only attract scum to the site

Idk

View 3 more replies »

amethyst1 · 36-40, F

@SStarfish I agree with the last paragraph (and all of it really). Someone once said but there are people with paraphanelias. True but it has gone too far and almost encourages somethings that are illegal.

Carissimi · 70-79, F

So all my quotes and poetry will disappear? I’ll have to start copying them all before you do this. I created these groups in EP, and if they are going away, all my posts to these groups go away. I don’t like this. Those groups are not hurting anyone, and they are uplifting to myself, and those who read them, when we need uplifting. @Andrew

candycane · 31-35, F

@Carissimi me as well

Elandra77

I think the blocking by key word is long past due and I glad to hear that is being implemented. Are we going to have the ability to mute groups-even after the restructure of them? For instance I dislike cheaters, no matter the reason or sex, so the "I am the Other Woman" group I would mute-or block. Being able to do that-after the group restructuring would let us tailor our experience better on the site.

There is also the issue of those who choose a category and post. They need dealt with.

Lastly can you create a "shoutout" category alongside questions and stories. For blurbs that are neither a question of a story. " I just drank a quart of Chocolate milk" is NOT a question or a story. but a shoutout. There are many more examples al over the question section.

Admin may want to watch more of folks posting stories and poems in the question section.. I believe this is done to get exposure to them. But they clearly do not belong- issuing warning may help curb that. After one does it so many times I would consider deletion of the post.

Andrew · Admin

[quote=Elandra77]Are we going to have the ability to mute groups-even after the restructure of them?[/quote]

Yes, users should be able to have this ability after this proposed change.

[quote=Elandra77]]There is also the issue of those who choose a category and post. They need dealt with.

Lastly can you create a "shoutout" category alongside questions and stories.[/quote]

This is something we will be thinking about, how to handle and properly sort more arbitrary types of topics.

amethyst1 · 36-40, F

@Andrew Sounds complex and like it would take a lot of time, but some of the 'shout outs' may possibly count as irrelevant when looking at similar groups. Some groups have no stories to them anyway and very few 'members' so at least some could be filtered out. I can't imagine the huge task this would be!

SW-User

Keyword blocks 😍

uncalled4 · 56-60, M

@SW-User OMG YES PLEASE

SW-User

@SW-User best answer! Even though it's not a question :)

Peapod · 61-69, F

I wish you guys could shut down all the real hardcore porn and talk of fetishes. It seems to me it's really dicey around young adults.

You have to know you CAN have a really busy site without it, right?

View 19 more replies »

SW-User

@VSonMe Yeah I agree to an extent with that. Adult content is different than porn to me and this is not intended to be a smut or porn site.

VSonMe · 56-60, M

@SW-User Glad we agree! I do take your point about minors and about the intent of the site. For me, SW is a safe place to explore issues that people find difficult or impossible to talk about in other environments. Necessarily, this will deal with sexual issues but obviously, this is not a sex site per se.

I think having the ability to avoid seeing topics that don't interest us or repulse us is sufficient, along with the ability to avoid interacting with users we find objectionable. My main point, btw, is not about having the ability to talk about taboo topics, it is about my distaste for censorship in general.

I respect that you are open about your identity to the extent that you need to be. My profile too is not fake although it obviously does not include my name. I think if I were pretending to be someone other than who i am, i would not choose to be a balding 54 year old!

I apologize for the tone of earlier posts.

SW-User

@VSonMe Hey thanks a lot. Appreciate all you said. Lol @ the balding 54 year old.

But yeah, I think people take things to the extreme and that's why there needs be censorship as you say. I'd rather say moderating. With the new coming structure should help weed out some of that.

I apologize for mine too. I'm grumpy sometimes and honestly admit it, lol. ✌

Longpatrol · 31-35, M

Can you add in an ability to better edit in the title box for questions? When i'm on the mobile and I make a typo I've got to live with spelling mistakes because I can't scroll to the end of the question effectively.

View 6 more replies »

Nuno · Admin

Oh! We were not aware of this. I will try to reproduce this and fix. Just to confirm, you mean you're having trouble accessing the last word(s) of the question title when editing?

Longpatrol · 31-35, M

@Nuno yes that’s correct. Of course the simple solution would be to ask shorter questions.

I was wondering whether perhaps a fix could be having the text box expand if editing needs to be done

Longpatrol · 31-35, M

@Stark sadly it did not work for me, just kept pushing the words out of view lol

SW-User

Could we get rid of all groups that refer to sex/spanking/whatever and have a child as the album image?

ProdigalSummer · F

@SW-User yes, please. Those groups that seemingly condone child abuse or exploitation for fetishes make me very uncomfortable

SW-User

@ProdigalSummer This seems like a no-brainer for a site that has been around for two years.

CountScrofula · 41-45, M

I like the idea - however I think four level deep is going to overwhelm users. You can probably get most of the same result with just two levels like:

Religion > Christianity

Music > Rock

etc...

I'm not sure what additional value is provided by allowing what may be hundred of subcategories when 80% of them may have minimal to no content or just one post each. I'm not sure the site produces the volume of data to require that kind of incredible level of categorization.

VSonMe · 56-60, M

@CountScrofula And who would be assiduous enough to follow it anyway. The Miscellaneous category would be huge.

CountScrofula · 41-45, M

@VSonMe It tends to be anyways - but the harder it is to categorize your posts, the sloppier people will be about it.

Stark

This seems pretty confusing and overwhelming 😅 but I’d like to say I appreciate all the hard work you guys put into this site. I know you’re doing your best to make it a great site as well as fulfill the members needs/wants here. Which I’m sure can be a bit overwhelming and pressuring for you guys. So I would like to say thanks anyway.

Magenta · F

I love it! Not sure how it will all work yet, but being able to filter out certain topics/groups and key words is sublime. I think it will make members less annoyed and their experience here much more enjoyable.

And cleaning up all the group redundancy is a huge positive. I applaud your efforts and professionalism. :-)

IAmJess

Wow, this sounds complicated, but I see where you are going and that would be amazing. Right now I usually keep my feed on Circle/Friends Only, but I would love to open it up as long as I could filter out certain topics (diapers, etc).

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

SW-User

Hi. Idk if it's any help but yeah, it's from a one liner site and this is how they do "topics" or" tags". So when you click a specific tag, you'll see all the posts under it. Idk how that works or if the users would even use the right tags. Lmao. 😂

[image deleted]
[image deleted]

Anyways, kudos to all your hard works!
😬👍🏻🎉

Stark

@SW-User That seems like a good suggestion

Chickie · F

@SW-User Oo, what site is this?

DragonFruit · 61-69, M

I think the group consolidation ideas are good.
I think the stance/preference idea is horrible and will only cause additional problems....the whole “verification” fiasco (which you forged ahead with despite the poll showing it was quite an unpopular idea) caused enough friction. DON’T make the same mistake twice.

*BTW, I’m sure none of the groups have an interest in being on SW (though some of the members may have an interest in them being here).

View 2 more replies »

DragonFruit · 61-69, M

@Andrew There was a VERY real problem about the verifications, with people refusing to communicate with those who were not (or were) verified. The topic dominated talk on the boards, and despite the fact that you gave us a poll you ignored the results....resulting in bad feelings about the moderators. Do you really want to go down that path again? This change appears likely to do that.
I strongly urge you to reconsider this (though I know your minds are possibly made up like they were the last time). I see no reason to even have this feature, and some people will be inquisitive enough to start questioning others as to their choices.
I also don’t see the “benefit” of constantly filtering out differences of opinion (although this is called “Similar Worlds”, some benefit is to be gained from differences of opinion).
As a former attorney, I understand freedom of choice....but I also understand stirring the pot unnecessarily, as well as the concept of “if it ain’t ‘broke’ don’t fix it”. I just don’t see this making anything better, and I do see it possibly making things considerably worse.

Part of the problem with EP was that they “fixed” things too often.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
-George Santayana

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Andrew · Admin

[quote=Dragon56]@Andrew There was a VERY real problem about the verifications, with people refusing to communicate with those who were not (or were) verified. The topic dominated talk on the boards, and despite the fact that you gave us a poll you ignored the results....resulting in bad feelings about the moderators. Do you really want to go down that path again? This change appears likely to do that.[/quote]

We did not ignore the poll results. We took it into consideration, but have not seen destabilization on this site from the release of that feature.

Yes, in the first days/week, some chose to "rebel" against that feature.
The same has happened many times in the past, with new and necessary changes made to SW over time.
Now that has all quieted down. we do keep updated about current problems users have with the site, and we no longer see much users make mention of the "Verification" feature as being a problem.

Maybe a very small handful still choose to talk about it and make it a problem... while there are very many (much more) who are already using and enjoying the feature.

Please keep in mind that [b]Thousands[/b] of unique users visit Similar Worlds daily.

A small subset of users (say 5-10) still complaining about Photo Verification, hardly represents the vast majority of users.

[sep]

[quote=Dragon56]I also don’t see the “benefit” of constantly filtering out differences of opinion[/quote]

Again, just as Photo Verification, it is all about [u]CHOICE[/u].

What may seem unnecessary, or a bad feature to you, may not be the same for others.

You do not have to use Topic Filtering options if you do not wish to.
Each user can Customize their experience here as best suits them.

Some people are "ok" with reading/absorbing many different point of views.

While others simply cannot "handle it", and prefer to only see content from like minded users.
Especially when it deals with topics they are very passionate about, such as Religion, Politics, Race, etc...

I'll quickly quote an example I just posted to another user:

[quote=Andrew]Using your example:
[b][u]I am African American[/u][/b]

[b]One person could be positive about their African history[/b], and often visits that group daily to post positive things and interesting historical facts about African Americans.

[b]Another person, may want to use that group for more negative reasons.[/b]
They may commonly visit to post about "African American crime statistics", or other such things to antagonize that particular community.

Therefore, I find it very useful to allow users to simply filter away the more "Negative" posts, and enjoy using SW without having to see other members constantly attacking their point of views or topics of interest.

So again, it's more of a way for "Like Minded" persons to connect and interact, without as much disturbance from those of opposite point of views.

The feature can't be "perfect", there will always be those few who bypass the system or intentionally try to misuse the feature.
But I believe that it can at least be "Better" for the community, for the most part.[/quote]

SW-User

When you do this consolidating are you going to get rid of groups that promote violence?
Like "I want to know your rape fantasies"
These groups are distrubing and promote violent acts against women.

VSonMe · 56-60, M

I think the attempt at centralization and control of group creation is a mistake. Apart from the dark aspect of censorship, it's just an awful lot of work to create a taxonomy of topics and to what end? The meager benefit of reducing duplication, if this is a benefit, is totally offset by the fact that creating a topic taxonomy and using it is subjective and, regardless of your efforts to organize posts, a natural entropy will occur anyway.

The chief result of this will be to annoy users who like the free-wheeling aspect of group creation that was EP. It is Big Brother-like and the censorship that stems from this centralization will have a chilling effect.

This is a waste of time at best and is likely to rile a lot of users. It will change the whole feel of the site and not in a good way. The quirkiness and whimsy of many groups will be gone and, with it, the energy and fun that such groups promote. It will seem like a Soviet-era EP.

BatRinseRepeat · 31-35, F

So - Do you like animals, or not?

Andrew · Admin

@BatRinseRepeat I do, yes.

marsbar · F

You guys are great! 😊

I’m glad you’re recreating new groups (topics) instead of sticking with the old EP ones. It didn’t seem right when someone would post a group with “EP” on it. Plus I know you guys will do a better job with spelling & grammar. 😅

Keepitsimple · 51-55, F

You guys are amazing! The site just keeps getting better and better. Thanks for your hard work and thank you so much for the filter ability so we don’t have to hear about politics and the weird fetishes!

TeresaRudolph71 · 51-55, F

Wow! This sounds like a lot of work. If it works like it's supposed to, it could make for a much better experience for many of us, though, as others have said, there will be those who will post in groups that are totally irrelevant to what they are posting about.

Also, I've been wondering for a while now, will we ever be able to create groups here? I realize that, with the project underway, this would create even more work for admin, who would have to make sure that the groups were put into the correct categories. But there may be things that I may want to post about, in the future, that may not fit into any of the current groups. Thus the need for such groups as "I Have Something To Say" or "I Don't Know Where to Put This." For now, groups like this are a sort of catch-all, and hopefully they will continue to be after the consolidation.

Maybe my question has already been answered in another post and I missed it. If so, I apologize for not keeping up on the latest news, but I have been wondering about that.

Longpatrol · 31-35, M

@TeresaRudolph71 I think they might limit or not even have user created groups.

EP had that for awhile and I believe it’s contributed some to the myriad of related groups we have on SW now, which of you’ll remember was imported off EP when the site was set up.

TeresaRudolph71 · 51-55, F

@Longpatrol I remember, and I'm aware that many redundant groups were created on EP. This was another site, but I remember that for a while, Answermug allowed people to create groups if admin approved them. I think they had to put in a request for a new group, and admin would either approve it or not. I wasn't on Answermug enough (though I was a member) to know how well that worked. But I can understand if they are hesitant to allow this, with all the redundant groups we have now.

VSonMe · 56-60, M

If the EP_imported groups go away, what will that do to everyone's profiles? Will we all start with a blank slate again?

Also, the [quote] trimming out groups that have no relevance or interest in being on Similar Worlds.[/quote] sounds like censorship. It means you are deciding which groups are allowed not the user community as was the case in EP.

Andrew · Admin

[quote=VSonMe]If the EP_imported groups go away, what will that do to everyone's profiles? Will we all start with a blank slate again?[/quote]

We will attempt to migrate all existing Groups and Posts to the correctly corresponding new Topics that will exist.

User profiles will be populated with content upon the upgrade, but everything will be better sorted and more relevant.

[quote=VSonMe]sounds like censorship. It means you are deciding which groups are allowed not the user community as was the case in EP.[/quote]

The Groups/Topics that will be removed will be based mostly on user feedback.

VSonMe · 56-60, M

@Andrew that just means that the loudest voices prevail and they are usually the ones that like to censor and prohibit. It is your site so do as you like but i am wary of your desire to control what topics are allowable.

Before idiots chime in with "but that would mean any filth is allowed" i would say there is already a reporting feature to flag illegal content, which i have used myself as the mods can confirm. Beyond that, i think expanding the ability to block viewing of topics people find unsavory is a much better solution than prohibiting them. If people want to find others with common interests such as peeing themselves, they should be allowed to do so. Those who want not to see that content should be able to block it like they can block users they find objectionable. I am opposed to people with delicate sensibilities who would prohibit a topic just because it offends them personally.

beckyromero · 36-40, F

[quote]Another dimension we would like to add to these SW Topics, is your "Stance/Preference" on each Topic. This can also act as a filter as well.[/quote]

I think that is completely unnecessary and will only serve to inflame opinions, especially on political or religious topics.

Why would you want to have a like / dislike count on groups entitled "I am African American , "I am Jewish" "I am Muslim"?

It will only encourage the haters!

[quote]Our aim is to create a HUGE "Tree" like structure of all relevant topics of discussion.
They will branch from "Parent" Topics/Categories, down to more specific Topics.

This will help greatly for organization, relevance and filtering.[/quote]

[b]Great idea![/b]

Although I really hope it doesn't screw up people's bookmarks in the process

[quote]we would like to "Consolidate" all SW Groups, whereby we will be merging relevant groups, [b][c=#BF0000]as well as trimming out groups that have no relevance or interest in being on Similar Worlds[/c][/b].[/quote]

[b]Bad idea![/b]

People have invested time in writing about experiences that may have garnered few responses or maybe the topic is controversial.

There were issues on EP where people's experiences would disappear either from a group or the group and all it's stories would disappear without any explanation.

Could it be maybe SW is concerned about storage space for stories or questions that don't get many responses or page views?

View 1 more replies »

beckyromero · 36-40, F

@Nuno [quote]just wanted to make it clear that we will not be deleting any posts by users[/quote]

Great to hear!

Thanks for all you do!

Andrew · Admin

[quote=beckyromero]I think that is completely unnecessary and will only serve to inflame opinions, especially on political or religious topics.

Why would you want to have a like / dislike count on groups entitled "I am African American , "I am Jewish" "I am Muslim"?

It will only encourage the haters![/quote]

I understand your points.
However, I do feel that this feature will help in more ways in the long run, rather than be a negative factor.

The feature is more about "Preference" and control of what a user wishes to see, or who they wish to interact with.

Using your example:
[b][u]I am African American[/u][/b]

[b]One person could be positive about their African history[/b], and often visits that group daily to post positive things and interesting historical facts about African Americans.

[b]Another person, may want to use that group for more negative reasons.[/b]
They may commonly visit to post about "African American crime statistics", or other such things to antagonize that particular community.

Therefore, I find it very useful to allow users to simply filter away the more "Negative" posts, and enjoy using SW without having to see other members constantly attacking their point of views or topics of interest.

So again, it's more of a way for "Like Minded" persons to connect and interact, without as much disturbance from those of opposite point of views.

The feature can't be "perfect", there will always be those few who bypass the system or intentionally try to misuse the feature.
But I believe that it can at least be "Better" for the community, for the most part.

beckyromero · 36-40, F

[quote]So again, it's more of a way for "Like Minded" persons to connect and interact, without as much disturbance from those of opposite point of views.[/quote]

Then, how about as others have suggested, a blocking option for groups?

If I stumble upon a group about human/animal sex, then I can just block it.

[quote]The feature can't be "perfect", there will always be those few who bypass the system or intentionally try to misuse the feature.[/quote]

You mean like Russian bots and troll farms in the election posting fake news stories on Facebook and other social media platforms? 😂

And of course that's the danger: people who WILL intentionally try to misuse the feature.

Just please tread very carefully with this.

questionWeaver

... listen to Leonardo

Elandra77

Since this was posted 8/22 we have heard nothing else about filtering words- what gives with this? That cannot be that hard to implement. I feel as if that should have put into effect by now.

Nuno · Admin

This is now implemented.

Elandra77

@Nuno Thanks You. Oddly I do not remember asking this in December? Must be age....

Faust76 · 46-50, M

So I guess that's in short "We're considering creating a hierarchy of topics, consolidating both questions and stories under the same hierarchy and features but with separate feeds, and allowing people to opt out of specific topics".

A LOT depends on how this is executed, part of me feels the current groups are very expressive and evocative, and no matter how this is executed that will be lost in a hierarchical structure. In part this goes back to when EP removed the story titles, though, so the group title becomes your opening line. It was also EP's innovation to have groups as distinct "I ..." statements that people could agree or disagree with (Of course, this got problematic with people creating groups without thinking how they work, like "I like girls") thereby creating shared experiences, or ahem, "similar worlds".

My hunch is this will lead to everybody using the equivalent of "I want to say something" to post, the hierarchical structure will either offer way too many topics (The inability to "cross-post" to multiple groups but so it's shown only once has always been the biggest flaw to me) to choose from, or way too few to choose anything sensible. Draconian punishments for choosing wrong topic will be subjective and put people off, as well as have no effect on people who are going to post objectionable stuff anyway. But we'll see how it goes.

Elandra77

What I would like to see, if you go your route , or what the voice of SW suggest is to let us have a favorite folder on SW. That is 12-15 sites we go to a lot and would be readily available at a click to go to. These can be static, meaning we pick them and change them at will - or they can be determined by the places we go over a weeks time.

Maybe I hate rock so Music > Rock. I will not want that. But perhaps I like Music > Rock > Punk. Rather than go through three branches (as above) let me save that as a shortcut (a favorite-not on my PC but on SW) The longer the branch the more time wasted.

It can be a a short list. 12-15 places easily saved for quick access.

Peaches · F

WOW! 😯This post was so long ago, when will all the tacky disgusting groups from EP be removed? 🤔 Well, thank goodness for the "adult filter." ⭐️

Peapod · 61-69, F

@Peaches, I am shocked at some of the titles of the fetish groups! Type in a tasteless word into the search engine and watch them all appear! SW needs to get rid of all that!!! One group could be formed and kept in its own corner. "Adult Sex". Problem solved for everyone.

Peaches · F

@Peapod I saw on a post this person offered to help remove them. I asked her what they said?🤔 They never replied...YES, that's a really good idea @Peapod!😉👌🏼

SW-User

I can block political groups?
Prayers answered...
What happens to the stories we posted under existing groups?

Andrew · Admin

[quote=Justmerae]I can block political groups?[/quote]

Yes, you would be able to, with our planned changes.

[quote=Justmerae]What happens to the stories we posted under existing groups?[/quote]

We will attempt to migrate all existing posts to the correctly corresponding new topics that will exist.

SW-User

@Andrew okay thanks

dreamsicle · 46-50, F

I know you have to be brilliant to do this, it’s just now occurring to me just how brilliant! With that being said, yes. (Do condense please! It would be appreciated.)

indyjoe · 56-60, M

This sounds like a terrific plan to me. Thank you for sharing this with us, I hope it all comes together and works out soon...looking forward to it.🤠

SW-User

This is fantastic news indeed
I posted a question related to this, not being aware of this post; earlier this morning

AnonymousJSS · 22-25, F

Omg THANK YOU. Finally getting rid of all the useless groups, THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!

SW-User

Feel free to delete the group "I Had Childhood Sexual Experiences"

Ladyryan · 51-55, F

Wonderful. I like the idea, less clutter of the nonsense groups.

OogieBoogie · F

OMG that was a bit to take in!
But appreciate you attempting to streamline things a bit.

Thanks for the continual improvement to this site
🤗👍😊

MsMontgomery · 51-55, F

Ok, that was a lot.
Just want to add a story & there is no group. Please make the group ‘Things my mom says’
.., also, clean house (delete) all groups that there are zero stories in. There are hundreds.
Thank you.

MsMontgomery · 51-55, F

@Andrew Well, It’s been over a month now since I asked for the creation of that group. It has still not been done. I suppose you did not deem it as exciting or wonderful as the peeing and pooping groups you seem to have a lot of.

MeisterAndrew · 41-45, M

[quote]To resolve the two problems highlighted above, we would like to "Consolidate" all SW Groups, whereby we will be merging relevant groups, as well as trimming out groups that have no relevance or interest in being on Similar Worlds.[/quote]
Sorry, but who decides what groups have relevance? I can understand groups that aren't used and likely never will but this sounds too much like censorship to me. We already have people suggesting groups to remove here and I'm afraid once you go down this route you will only fuel the "moral" police and snowflakes on the site.

We were promised the ability to create groups a long time ago and not to seek approval for what we post.

Butterflykisses24 · 51-55, F

Great work.

EugenieLaBorgia · F

Very nice and considerate work! Can we have a particular place set aside for those who wish to lace every sentence with expletives/ swear words. I noted many hours ago that yet another cretin found it necessary to extol, what they clearly considered to be, the 'virtues' of swearing. Although, in the past, the swear word was , occasionally, the chosen adjectival form of fine writers and novelists, it was not abused and was delivered with precision according to the context and style of their chosen work.
Many of us now realize, though, that these expletives and the puerile and naive use of them are often associated with the words used by the violent sex offender, the psychopath and the sociopath. Let them have their own little room where they can share these 'virtues' and their probable depravities and, perhaps, annexed to this room a 'crying-room' where they can weep bitterly when they are berated more vigorously by their fellow, verbal ingrates.

As a final thought: Your efforts to protect members from abuse have been exemplary. Avail [u]yourselves [/u] of those methods , too, and permit no abuse of the site and to yourselves.

amethyst1 · 36-40, F

Yes! Hit the nail on the head. This has been an issue for ages. I never knew which group to post in and they're not really 'groups'. And there are many similar groups for one topic... But it's such a big thing to cover as you said, with not just the groups but the question topics.

It's now December and I don't think you have done anything yet? I would at least perhaps work on merging the story/group headings. You may well need a completely new system altogether though and a huge overhaul. The only thing is you wouldn't want to delete people's stories. I noticed last year that some people were asking me 'groups? What groups?' and weren't aware of this system and stories.

I know the topics I have ticked for ones I am interested in - I still get a good amount of stories and questions on things that I am not interested in or really don't want to see. I guess there wasn't a dislike button as you said...

I was just going through my groups having not been on here in a while, and thought it would be useful to know how many stories I had posted under each (if applicable) as I don't want to leave a group and consequently have a story I wrote deleted without realising it.

Be interesting to know how you're getting along with this.

Sepia · 36-40, F

This is great. It will formalised stories in good content. I truly support this feature. Good job admins!👍

abooklover · 56-60, F

Great ideas. I always disliked the redundant groups on EP. It was chaos. Good luck in development.

BitterSweetPotato · 31-35, F

What is the possibility of allowing us to see who of our friends is online? Like the way EP was structured, to have a list of our friends showing on the side of the profile and it shows the online ones. It is really nice and helpful, we don't have to look someone up to see their status and it increases the number of responses from friends, because they are reminded to check our profile this way.

Chickie · F

Just to clarify will this also mean that I'll be able to block/filter out BDSM, Diaper, Peeing/Watesports, and Pooping groups?

Nuno · Admin

@Chickie We are currently working on that. Will be released before this group consolidation project.

DayDreaming2 · F

@Nuno Blocking/filtering out certain groups is what I have been waiting for since day one here.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Andrew · Admin

@KellyLancaster, you are free to express your opinions on SW and disagree with our proposals/changes/actions as you see fit.

[b]However, please [u]do not use inappropriate/foul language[/u] at the SW Staff.
Likewise, the SW Staff is not allowed at any time to use foul language at any of the site's members.[/b]

None of our staff have addressed you in such a way, so please keep mutual respect and do not address any SW Staff with inappropriate language.

[i](As pointed out to me, you have asked in several posts/comments the reason behind your current warning. What I have explained above is the reason)[/i]

[quote]This user has been warned due to a violation of Similar Worlds Terms of Service.
[b]Reason:[/b] Inappropriate comments or posts.[/quote]

VSonMe · 56-60, M

@Andrew that seemed like a questionable yellow card to @KellyLancaster. She didn't insult you just used a common expression to add force to her point that she thought your post was unclear.

You seem to have a thin skin.

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

@Andrew Could that particular warning that you used be apart of the flagged reported items?

[quote]inappropriate/foul language [/quote]

You folks handled such a reported item of mine yet I believe I was forced to use the "Fetish/sensitive" item when it was really foul language.

BTW That was quickly done. Thanks

masterofyou · 70-79, M

The more you do the more you screw things up .. my opinion...

SW-User

I like this idea @Nemiko pointed me at this post.

I feel the big lacking here is the ability to create sub-communities within communities. This would really help start to create that if you implemented. Can I also suggest a chatboard at some level in this hierarchy where all those in a topic - maybe the second of third level in your example hierarchy

ChampagneOnIce · 51-55, F

Thanks so much for all you do to improve this site. I’m looking forward to the ability to block certain groups, topics and keywords. Will we be able to filter out questions from our feed, and/or only see the topics we’re interested in in our feed? I prefer stories to questions. Thanks again.

Andrew · Admin

@ChampagneOnIce, thanks for the feedback.

[quote=ChampagneOnIce]Will we be able to filter out questions from our feed, and/or only see the topics we’re interested in in our feed?[/quote]

Yes, all members should have this ability once these changes are implemented.

ChampagneOnIce · 51-55, F

@Andrew That’s awesome! Thanks!

OfflineFriend · 22-25

Very nice presented I like the idea

Question : are you going to do something about the overused topics , like community? ( For example community can be used for most question )

Edit : have you got a visual concept on how the navegation will look for the user ?

Longpatrol · 31-35, M

@OfflineFriend I've always used community for questions or observations about our own SW community. I thought that's what it's for.

OfflineFriend · 22-25

@Longpatrol yes but most question are on the community tap so I think they should add topics so not everything is on community

Andrew · Admin

@OfflineFriend, thanks.

[quote=MagnifiqueGirl]Question : are you going to do something about the overused topics , like community? ( For example community can be used for most question )[/quote]

Yes, we will think about how best to handle more arbitrary types of posts.
As the topics will be much more separated than they currently are, we aren't expecting any single topic to be over-used for random posts.

[quote=MagnifiqueGirl]Edit : have you got a visual concept on how the navegation will look for the user ?[/quote]

We have some drafts that we are still working on.
We will try to share these visuals with members once they are more concrete.

As this post already had so much information (I believe many didn't want to read the entire post), it seems best to include more details in a future post.

1-50 of 62

Add a comment...