• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • More a common sense suggestion. If you start a panel, could you provide an explanation of (a) what it’s about and (b) who the participants are going to be. If you’re not sure which of your invites is going to show up it would still be helpful to do something simple like this:

      Several professional rodeo clowns 🤡 are on today’s panel to discuss how they got a spot on this year’s PBR circuit.

      It’s starting to feel like click bait of late with panels started without enough information to know whether to click FOLLOW.

      Please and thank you 🙏

    • Thank you, apm. Vilen, Brian and Victoria have all things panels high on their list because hopefully Victoria will be arranging some very interesting ones starting in January. We'd really like to nail a way for the audience to ask questions if the panel opts to allow it.

    • I wonder if it might be worth driving home the panel metaphor by also having an

      agenda: a textbox at the top of a page, with some meta-information/summary about the panel that follows, besides just the title and topics, and a

      conference: a separate(?) area where everyone can post, but only the panel moderator (the user who started the panel post) can see all posts and make them visible in the panel conversation.

      Both already can be achieved via some workarounds, like having a separate "open" conversation and adding information to the initial post - but it might be helpful to standardize this.

    • Wow, having a way to ask questions—without reducing the signal to noise ratio—would be amazing.

      I think I can speak for @JazliAziz and others in saying that the offer still stands if there are specific actions we can take to help with promotion.

      Maybe if you prepared an image with details on each upcoming panel we could then tweet it: if all I have to do is upload the pic and hit tweet, you’ve made it impossible for me to tweet incorrect info to my followers.

    • Now that I have seen several different ways panels have worked, I just want to make an observation. When a cake person decides to organize a panel as a way to have a public but closed conversation with other cake people and does not introduce a thoughtful reason for the panel and thoughtful reasons for the panelists, it can come across as the online equivalent of brown-nosing and/or self-promotion.

      I second the idea of requiring an agenda (or at least a central question or two), and a reason why certain people have been invited as panelists. This would not prevent brown-nosing or utter frivolity, but would inform the rest of us up front so we could tune in or tune out right away based on that introductory information.

      If a side-channel for open conversation is developed, please include a link to that thread alongside the purpose for the panel and the participants’ info.

    • Yes! In fact, it was after seeing this that I thought, “I should just post my general feelings about this” support the way you set up this panel and register frustration with other panels that aren’t set up this way. 😉 Nicely done. 👍🏻