Subscribe to this blog by:
The Questionland site is about to undergo a pretty significant redesign. Before that happens we thought it would be a good idea to give you a preview and get feedback.
I can tell you what we were trying to accomplish and you can tell me whether we have succeeded and, of course, offer your comments and suggestions.
The Primary Goals
1. Following People, Questions and Topics
This is a fundamental feature that has been requested for some time. Now you can follow people and be notified of their contributions when they happen. You can also follow questions you are interested in and be notified as the answers come in.
2. More Accessible Aesthetic
I know that those of you who are long time members of Questionland have generally liked our somewhat quirky (ye olde rural rustic) design aesthetic and have befriended the Mushroom and the Gnome. But we have found that it is off-putting for first-time visitors, does not convey the locale well enough, and does not do justice to the quality of your contributions. In short, it seems a bit “jokey” and so we have tried to make it a little more legitimate feeling while, we hope, still keeping it fun (see “rotating banners” below). The Mushroom will still be awarded for the best answers. As the Gnome likes to say: “We’ve been moved from the front office to the back office”.
3. Showcasing Content and People
We have such great people on Questionland and they provide such great insights and answers about life in Seattle. We didn’t do a great job of showcasing those people before so we’ve improved that.
4. Voting
You can no longer vote a question up or down, instead you can either follow it or not. There was very little voting on questions anyway and it was not a good indicator of interest in a question. Now you will be able to view questions not just by recency, but by “most followed” as well.
We are still in the midst of a discussion about whether we should get rid of voting things down. Overall it seems to rarely used by our best members and can be a very negative experience for people who are just trying to help. The one concrete thing down-votes provide is a way to filter out bad contributors. But they are so rare that normal moderation will probably suffice. Your opinion would be appreciated.
5. Rotating Banners & The Questionland Logo
Questionland is defined by its community and the city it is in. So rather than take the traditional “branding/logo” route, we decided to do something different. We thought we’d ask you (and ourselves) to take pictures from around the city and integrate “Questionland Seattle” into the picture. “Questionland Seattle” can be integrated into a bus sign, a street sign or can mimic a well known logo from around town.
The photographer/author will be credited and we’ll include a link for more details on the photo and photographer as well as a brief summary of when and where it was taken. The specifications for the picture are that it needs to be very wide and very short (1200+ px wide and 150px *exactly*tall). Send your submissions to banners@questionland.com.
If you have a great picture that you would like us to use and have a good idea of how to integrate the logo, but have no idea how to do it… ideally ask a friend, but if all else fails submit it to us and tell us your idea and we’ll see if we can do it.
Preview Gallery
- Question
- People
- Profile
- Browse Topics
- Tooltips
Your Feedback
Foisting a new site design on a great community of people who make Questionland such a useful and civilized place to learn about Seattle is a mixed blessing. We like making it better and adding things you have asked for but are loathe to redecorate the place we all inhabit without the input of our co-inhabitants. Unfortunately, a significant redesign requires that much of the work be done (and re-done many times) behind the curtain and directed by us.
But now that we have something that we think makes sense we wanted to give you a preview and get your feedback to see how close we came to our objectives and whether you think those were the right objectives to begin with. So we would appreciate your comments on this post to tell us what you think or you can add your feedback here.
Thanks for making Questionland great and for being so helpful to the community.
 |  |  |  |
I don’t like the “Top Contributors” objective. Many of them no longer frequent Questionland, plus they are mostly top contributors because they post many times more often than average. Highlighting them means not highlighting people who post more sporadically but may have quality, well-researched and polite answers.
The one concrete thing down-votes provide is a way to filter out bad contributors. <<— I got two down votes for providing a factual response to "what iranian directors do documentaries?" Tell me how the response "Abbas Kiarostami is a famous Iranian director who has made documentaries" identifies me as a "bad contributor." Is it not true? Was the response not in English? Was it impolitely worded?
I also gave heaps of answer and response space to a question that the questioner did not acknowledge nor give a mushroom to. Three other people were interested in the information and found it useful, but that didn't translate into many up-votes or a mushroom.
I'm used to seeing "Questions" category component positioned more prominently. I wouldn't be necessarily interested in answers unless I asked a question or followed a question, so the question-first,answer-later model makes more sense to me.
Don’t really need to follow people on questionland. That’d be a different website, peoplebook or something. The only time I’m interested in browsing through someone’s Q’s and A’s is when they have a negative reputation and all their answers are collapsed. I visit the site everyday.
But I can see how you’d top contributors featured somehow, below or next to the questions would be good.
I’m pro the changes. I’ve gotten used to the current aesthetic, but I’ve never been a fan of it.
Losing down votes is a good idea. If I do take issue with an answer it is too easy just to down vote, but much more constructive to say why. The discussions that follow unpopular answers are interesting, and may help the person who asked the Q. OTOH, the upside of being hit with a bunch of down votes is making the answerer more thoughtful about tone and content.
I’d be sad to see the “whatever” category go. It is one of my favorites.
When you say the banner must include “the logo”, is there a specific logo we should use? Or just the word Questionland?
When does this redesign launch? When does the general public get exposed to it?
I think keeping “thumbs down” on answers is still a good thing, provided that it really is not being abused. Some answers just aren’t helpful, and the community ought to be the ones to judge when that happens.
Case in point – as of this moment one of the top questions is “Is there an argument against getting a flu shot?” Someone answered with bad advice that showed that they don’t understand how immunization works, and it’s received several thumbs down, and none up. That’s a pretty good clue for someone not well versed in the topic to know that someone’s just full of it, and I’m not sure what the moderators would do in this case anyway. It’s doubtful that they have all the expertise to know when bad answers are being proffered.
I think all the other changes, including ditching the thumbs up/down for specific questions, look good.