Simplifying our Discourse categories

It feels to me like our current set of Discourse categories isn’t really working–having the categories all nested makes them confusing, and the categories are too finely grained. I’d like to significantly simplify the organization. Here’s what I propose:

  • The Credsperiment: Stuff pertaining to SourceCred’s own cred, grain distributions, weight changes, etc.
  • Research: Questions about how SC works, proposals to change it, etc. Absorbs “system design”
  • Community: Stuff pertaining to the SC community itself, including governance, community calls, culture discussion.
  • Media: Contains art, podcasts, links to presentations
  • Site Feedback: Kept as-is
  • Initiatives: Keep this category more-or-less as-is

In this proposal, all other categories would be deleted or retired.

What do y’all think?

1 Like

Adding tags seems like a nice improvement too. I’d like to treat these as independent changes, though; one step to change simplify the categories, another to propose a tag system. I haven’t looked much into how tags on Discourse work, so I don’t feel confident championing any such change myself just yet.

My rule of thumb is to optimize for “finding a topic by clicking through”. Which would be improved by reducing the number of categories.

When a proposed category already sees a fair amount of usage, it makes sense to give it’s own (sub)category. For example community calls, podcasts and payouts would be an improvement for easy click through.

Some of these could be solved with a super-topic instead. For example payouts, would be fine without it’s own category when SourceCred Contributor Payouts is pinned in the CredSperiment category.

Community calls seems better to me as a sub-category.

:+1: for tagging

Can’t agree more, general category plus subtitle would be super practical and concise.