• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • I understand the concern about lack of feedback—but is there a way to PM OPs?


      Edit: Is there really no way to PM other members? Will the @ tag trigger a notification in this environment, @Vilen?

    • The natural progression of the Panels and the way we envisioned them originally was to allow the panel starter to open the Panel to submit questions from the audience. Only panelists would be able to see all questions. They could then decide to pick some interesting and insightful questions from the audience to answer publicly. The mechanism of how that would work is something we are still building and that would be an optional feature of the Panels.

    • Hmmm... and after the report is done could the creater open comments to all? I like the idea of a single poster telling his/her story without interruptions. But once the story is told it would also be nice to hear reactions from readers.

    • Marc, we also feel and hear the need for this feature: allow the conversation starter to finish telling their story before others can jump in. This is something I've personally wanted for some time now.

      I don't think it is actually a type of a "Panel conversation" but instead is a public conversation that can be "paused" until the conversation starter has finished telling their story. It is analogous to how we have real life conversation and you'd want to let the person finish instead of interrupting them. However, in real life there are visual cues that tell you when to jump in the conversation, but there isn't a way to have those signal online. It is a tough problem to solve, but I'll keep thinking about a simple and intuitive solution.

    • I noticed that a panel was started yesterday but has no participants other than the OP. Since we don't have private messages, unless we know eachother through other channels, there would seem to be no way to know if someone is actually interested in participating. Perhaps there should be some way of hiding the panel until at least two people have agreed to join. A panel of one doesn't make a lot of sense to me, though as was pointed out above, it could be used as something like a blog. But then, why not call it that?

    • One thing I just noticed is that there doesn't appear to be any way to sort the conversations I see when I come to Cake -- specifically, I'd like to be able to look for panels, but I don't see a "bring panels to top" or "show panels only" button. Not sure if others would be interested in that kind of functionality, but I personally would be.

    • As you have stated, ride reports are the jewel in the Advrider crown.

      MikeO, Vance, metaljockey, Sean, broke the mould by heading out on epic rides and documenting them on advrider.

      Would a panel of some or all of the above, discussing their trips work?

    • I'd suggest MikeO, Seán, metaljockey, Glen (striking viking), those RR's ignited my imagination.

      I'm sure other inmates can chime in with suggestions also?

    • May I make a suggestion? Eight panelists is just too many. My favorite panel discussions are with three or fewer panel voices. More than three (and I may be being generous saying three), and the whole thing gets completely out of hand. The recent panel with women riders is a case in point. Obviously, the subject is of interest to me, and I know a lot of the participants already. But boy, howdy—even I could not stand all the back and forth. It became so disjointed, it just started to feel like ranting and rambling. Ugh.

      I am the same way when it comes to f2f panels. If there are more than three panelists, I skip the session. A panel of three requires an unusually skilled moderator to keep things from getting off track. Like you, I really enjoy the repartee one sees when watching a panel of two. I also really enjoy a good one-on-one interview. Those are often very thought-provoking.

      Just my two cents... 😬

    • I was fascinated by that panel/interview! I thought it was great. I’d love it if you could do a similar interview/panel with Jobs’ daughter who just released her book, Small Fry.

      (Have you followed the advrider thread with the guy who is interviewing other adventurous inmates? I just stumbled into it a bit ago. There seems to be a general understanding that one guy is conducting the interviews and when he’s done, he invites anyone else to chime in with comments/questions. I thought it was amazing that inmates generally seem to accept that format and don’t overstep.)

    • @Chris - is there a way to find just the panels in one place? I would like an easy way to get to where the “experts” have been talking. 🙂 Is there a ”panels” category to follow?

    • Hmmm, that's a good idea. Lemme see if I can get to that over the weekend. We're thinking of hiring someone to go out and get compelling panels, an editorial director of sorts. I think they will become very important.

    • Fantastic idea to get a panel curator in place. I agree that panels could be a way to skirt the popularity contest aspect of social media and keep Cake’s focus on quality content. Glad to see you are sticking to your guns on that concept.

    • more thoughts on a panel curator (this idea has captured my attention)...

      1. Good idea to have current panel threads go from an active category to an archived category after a few months? This would subtly convey the idea that Cake recognizes people change over time, and what someone shares in a panel conversation today may not be true for them in a few months...

      2. The panels category would be my personally-selected home page (so to speak) after the “for you” list of updates—frankly, that’s how/where I would discover new categories (attached to panels) rather than trying to weed through the categories listings again and again to see what’s new. (I kind of work that way now with the “for you” list—I look at categories on those messages and then follow rather than look at the big list. Looking at the big list just got me started in Cake.) One of the most curious things about Cake is its commitment to content over personalities, and yet it is the most isolated/isolating platforms I’ve experienced. For now, the “for all” stream is not much different than my “for you” stream, but that’s probably because Cake is still in beta? (Ha. Beta.) I imagine when things really start to scale, categories are going to get way out of hand, and my preferred shortcut is going to be seeing what experts are discussing...

    • This would work in my thread request for a multi search, since anyone can make a panel, you would want a way to filter through to find what you are looking for. Even response count/activity would help.

      As more folks join and the magnitude of single post drop and walk posts grow the search and category searching is going to be critical, otherwise it is a scrolling nightmare.

    • I would also make a strong argument against opening a “Cake Panels” category up to the membership to use as a tag for panels that are not curated by the Cake Curator/Team. If that category is cluttered up with panels that are haphazardly organized or self-serving, it would dilute the core value of the platform.

    • Yet for devil's advocate the panel option is open to all.

      I can make a panel thread with just me to restrict comments if more of a story mode post.

      I have suggested a feature to close a open thread to comments until the original poster is finished, that way multi post story content can be complete without interruption between posts.

      Having a multi filter search enables users to find Panels of interest.

      Maybe I am missing something, very possible  🤪

    • I agree—using the panel capability to post a thread that blocks outside comments is a good thing. My observation was about differentiating these closed-comment threads from Cake-curated panel discussions. Seems like two different animals to me...

    • I would have liked to continue and contribute to @Evergreens post Adventure Blues topic but it's been raised as panel and appears to have stalled.
      It would seem an example that a panel needs to consist of panelists that have made a commitment to actively contribute to a conversation, or some sort of check whether the discussion really should be a panel?

      Is there any way of converting Post Adventure Blues back to a public discussion?

    • That's a very good point. Currently there is no way to convert a panel to a public conversation, but it might be a very good idea. I'll have to talk this over with the team because they usually think of things I don't, like this may open the panelists up to trolling, a reason they only agreed to a panel and not public conversation in the first place.