Promoting/Inviting Infinite Conversations (as a whole)

Hey guys,

Just a few thoughts on this discussion platform as a whole. This is probably going to be something we’ll work on after we get our major projects up and running (podcast, MetaPsy etc) but it’d be interesting to promote Infinite Conversations as an alternative platform and discussion community to major Facebook and Google+ groups; maybe eventually we can develop more open discussion for other generalized categories.

It’s also possible those might branch off from #LITGEEKS and MetaPsy editorial conversations. Just a thought!


YES. Absolutely. I think there’s a need for a place that’s dedicated to support deep and substantial and (ultimately, I hope) time-free conversations, and where that’s the ultimate purpose and focus of the platform.

Keep in mind, also, this really is open-source software. Discourse is meant be to be customized, have plugins created for it, etc. Given the resources, we can develop to meet the unique needs of our community.

At the beginning, I think we should focus discussion around content we’re bringing forth (litgeeks reads, MetaPsy pieces, etc.) but ultimately, I think we can open it up. It’s kind of what I’m imagining the #commons category to be, at least as a starting place.


Hey Jeremy is there anything else about alternative?

What kind of alternative?

Just curious…

Great Marco!

And when you think we can open it up, open it up is like what?

Well, technically, it’s open now. Anyone can sign up and post here. We just haven’t been promoting this quite yet.

I pause only because I want to be deliberate about what we’re growing, nurture the seeds we’ve planted, and not invite in a lot of random stuff and noise. Also, I guess, I don’t want to be overwhelmed while there’s still so much to do for launching other intiatives (e.g., #metapsychosis journal).

I think it’s valuable to have someone (or some people) consciously holding the space—sprinkling encouragement here, trimming spammy stuff there, proposing interesting lines of thought, and basically “moderating” (in some more generative sense of the word) in service of fruitful dialogue.

Maybe we have themed discussion areas with dedicated hosts? Maybe we play with different styles of interaction—not always the brainiac stuff, but also stories, poems, experimental stuff, etc.?

It’s possible as well to have different levels of privacy. For example, the “commons” is currently set up for “regular” members, which are determined programmatically by number of visits, time spent on site, feedback (via likes, etc.). There is no advertising-driven tracking. But the forum itself recognizes positive engagement and gradually “trusts” recurring visitors more, giving them access to different areas or giving them new powers. We can also promote people manually.

The point being to create “civilized” conversation spaces and avoid people flaming and doing drive-by shootings and just sharing random crap.

We can tweak all this as we learn and grow! And certainly open to feedback and suggestions…

1 Like

I agree, Marco, no drive by shootings, please!

And Marco says, " I want to be deliberate about what we’re growing here,
nurture the seeds we’ve planted, and not invite in a lot of random stuff
and noise."

And nurture the seeds we’ve planted… and not invite a lot of random stuff
and noise… and overwhelm…

And what kind of we is that we when the seed we’ve planted, we’re growing
here ( I get the garden metaphor) and who are we that that we can make
that happen?

Of course we are lit geeks and that is a nice way of identifying
us and we are also metaphors waiting to be born, we are giving birth to our
own metaphors, and if we are deliberate enough, we might find out how we
can do that even better.

And all of that noise…and when does the noise become a signal?

I am not sure as we are spread out among different time zones and have
a difficult relationship with Time and are not time free yet and so we do
have the constraints and the opportunities that the technology provides
for us but how to make this happen?

As a student of discourse I am always looking for metaphors, implied or
embodied, and in that looking I hope to make a contribution, a perhaps very
modest contribution, to tease out possibilities, in the various language
games we employ. Pardon if this is kind of weird way of working, I am not
an expert on discourse analysis I am just curious how people share
metaphors and develop them when invited to do so and how we can start to
share our metaphors, analogies, hunches, etc., in a way that transforms
noise into signals. I am a Systemic Modeler so this forum is a real
pleasure to observe and participate with.

I would say to Marco and Jeremy to keep up what you are already doing and
do more of it an do it even better. Blessings, good people, upon this noble

1 Like

Hey Johnny!

‘We’ is whoever shows up, I guess, being attracted to what we’re putting out, then adding their own creative DNA to it.

I’m recalling Gebser’s line about knowing when to let things happens, and when to make things happen. Lots of taoist kind of wisdom in that.

As well, our local farmer talks about the importance of healthy soil. The healthier the soil (which means it contains a rich and balanced milieu of microbial activity), the healthier the “good” plants you’re trying to grow, and the harder it is for “bad” plants or other infectious life forms to gain a foothold. Thus there’s less need for weeding, applying pesticides, etc.

I saw the Gebser read as a way of preparing the ground. Doing the hard tilling work. Planting lots of seeds. Toughening our muscles for the sowing and harvesting ahead.

Does that speak to your systemic modeling?

This is a good point! At some point it does, doesn’t it…and we’ve got to let it in, or at least pay attention to what the signal might mean. :radio: :alien:

1 Like