Here’s the embedded link
Here’s the embedded link
Thanks for the suggestion!
Our plan right now is for submitted questions to be visible initially only to the panel creator, who can then approve or dismiss them. Once approved, a question will be visible to other panelists, and once at least one panelist has answered the question, it will become visible to the world.
The reason for this is that when questions are public, the questions themselves can be avenues for abuse, harassment, or sometimes they can be repetitive or self-aggrandizing ("less of a question, more of a statement", etc.).
Panels can attract a large audience. Since the point of panels is to allow panelists to post while others read in order to keep the signal to noise ratio high, we want to make sure that questions don't become an avenue for noise.
May I suggest another idea?
For some online workshops (panels in Cakespeak), there is an invisible panel (usually 2-3 friends of the workshop leader) who handle the audience participation stuff so the workshop leader can focus on facilitating the online workshop. The invisible panel screens audience questions/comments, and passes along the gist of the ones they think will help round out the public discussion before the workshop winds up.
Expecting the workshop (panel) creator to do the screening while also facilitating the workshop (panel) might be too complicated and discourage some from volunteering. Having the option to invite 2-3 invisible screeners gives the panel creator a sense of support, as well as giving Cake another avenue to help create a sense of community.
I don’t know how difficult this would be to facilitate technically, but it’s a thought...
This probably won't be a part of our first iteration, but it's a great idea and I absolutely think we should add this feature in the future. Thank you!
I’m pretty sure trip reports is what gave Chris the idea for Panels in the first place. 😉
I didn't read all of the responses below but I have an opinion and that's what 'interneting' is for right?
I like the workshop format when there are a lot of people who either need ideas or want to share their ideas. Lotsa things flying around stick where they are most needed. It's brainstorming essentially.
I like the interview format for focus. "We" are distracted folks these days. I love talking to one person about only their ideas and actions. Then I; or whoever is listening, can distill those ideas into either 1) things that are useful to explore further or 2) things to throw away or just don't apply for me.
However; workshop and panel style convey more ideas in a short timeframe. Interviews convey focused ideas in the same timeframe. So I think it comes down to knowing your audience. Do they need and want a wide array of ideas to chew on or do they want directed opinions and advice?
A workshop, in my mind, is a gathering of people with a similar interest who are ready to share their perspective and actively learn from one another. It is likely they already have some experience with the topic, but they are still open to forming ideas and developing new insights. There is an interesting new synergy that emerges when everyone provides input and they learn from one another.
The above is @lidja ‘s definition. Slightly different from yours, but the common thread is a genuine interest in learning from each other: even if there’s an expert leading the workshop, he/she should at least gain insights on what worked well instructionally.
Since your profile mentioned that you are a photographer, would you mind giving me your feedback on this recent workshop idea?