17 April 2010 at 20:28 #19079
I feel quite strongly that a “social” networking sites for professionals should be more “professional” and less “social” in climate. What I mean by that is that if I log on to the TES forum I might expect to see people posting under pseudonyms, but, to be honest, it does mystify me and makes me a little distrustful of the person posting, that they would wish to maintain anonymity. People should be expected to be open and honest with a minimum of information here.
I would urge for some policing of profiles to require all members to have entered their real full name and their place of work (as a miniumum). I think that this is a very high priority, so that the correct ethos is established from the start, before bad habits become ingrained. This is a site for professional collaboration, and everyone should be able to immediately establish exactly who they are communicating with. I would urge owners of groups (especially closed ones, at that), in particular, to expect this now.
Real names should appear on posts, instead of usernames. I would also like for real names to appear when the mouse is hovered over the tiny profile pictures of group membership lists and for these small thumbnails to be bordered by different coloured borders to identify the professional employment of the member — e.g. 8 categories: teachers (inc trainees), university education/ITT researchers/lecturers, university physics researchers/lecturers, IoP employees, awarding organisations, educational publishers, governement (DCSF, QCDA, OfQual, etc), “other”. I am currently uncomforatble that the cross-section of the 1500 or so current membership is not transparent to me. In fact, I would like the membership to be listed under these headings, with the ability to filter on them.
23 April 2010 at 17:48 #19080
Thank you for more well-supported ideas.
The TalkPhysics team will shortly be looking at this whole issue, not least as an attempt to minimise spamming. It was felt that a major possible advantage of TalkPhysics over email discussion lists is the knowledge of who you are addressing.
We had begun from a logic of requesting a minimum of information at registration to encourage users to register, but we are likely to start by more information compulsory at start-up.
We may well develop something like your last idea with tagging – that just as we will shortly have groups and resources with tags and being able to search them, we should be able to extend the idea to users. This will need to be a later stage. I’m not sure whether we’ll reach the “mouse-over” idea – I would also like to see this on the Dashboard, but is technically difficult.
23 April 2010 at 18:25 #19081
I agree about the anonymity aspect. It made Second Life rather problematic for educational purposes.
25 April 2010 at 16:49 #19082
By the way…
On the list of members, why am I “Stuart Billington Billington”? No-one else seems to have such an affliction!
25 April 2010 at 20:19 #19083
Very strange. You only have a single Billington in your posts and on your profile. But your surname is doubled up when you do a search on contacts (and therefore in the list).
Another one for the developer, I’m afraid.
28 April 2010 at 16:08 #19084
Nearly all of the first 800 people to join TalkPhysics used their full real names. The next 1000, however, have pretty much fallen 50:50. That’s about 500 people using TalkPhysics who are using pseudonyms or abreviations. So, either the first 800 names were added from a list, centrally (?), or this behaviour has evolved.
As I’ve said, I feel strongly that this should not occur on a professional networking site — and if it is something that has emerged I feel that it should be addressed earlier rather than later, before it becomes (even more) endemic.
28 April 2010 at 16:10 #19085
By the way,
There’s also David Peet Peet, Edforum forum, JonAdmin Clarke Clarke (!), Dave Smith Smith, …
Do we have anything in common? Time of joining? Actions we’ve all performed?
Seems a very strange bug if it’s random…
28 April 2010 at 16:44 #19086
I think the double surname is down to the time we joined. We’ll look into it.
7 June 2010 at 11:21 #19087
For the last couple of weeks, we have required all new members to complete their profiles before posting any messages.
We didn’t impose this on existing members to avoid confusing things by changing the site’s behaviour. Group owners could ask existing members to complete their profiles. I have begun doing this for people who have posted to the Hub’s groups.
The double surname has also been solved.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.