I would love to have a "discussion tool" to use. Ultimately I am looking for some way to post/generate content and then have a [closed] discussion about that particular content. I do not know what interface I would like to use. The web is great for display, but I like "Usenet" for threaded discussions.
I have many ideas, most of which have been displayed on my blog. Some of these ideas are worthy of greater discussion, and some have even been created for that express purpose (to dialog, discuss, and debate the issue to further discover truth). Presently only one of my blog entries came even close to sparking a discussion, but it quickly died.
It could be the reason I do not have any discussions has nothing to do with the tools available (or not available) but with the people encountering my material. It could be the people do not want to discuss my ideas.
As I see it there are problems with the current way(s) of doing things.
This method is currently being employed, but the comment system is not a great place to carry on a discussion. For one there is not a threaded view. For another reason, people will need to continually check back with the page to see if new comments have been posted and need to be responded to. This has proved to not be the norm. People tend to fire off a comment and forget it.
This is a good method, by and large, as it involves people who want to be involved in discussions, but does not offer a way to ignore threads. All threads will be sent and people will have to delete the threads they do not want, rather than just ignoring them.
This also does not allow for the comments to be integrated into the current blog, thus there are no public displays of the discussion (this may not be a problem).
This also has the problem of not being integrated with web sites (and should not as the web is continually trolled for email addresses by spammers). Thus when a person reads the blog they would then have to start a discussion thread in a separate mailing list referencing the site.
This method would be rather good as it would provide a means to ignore threads, provide an easy interface to the archives, and could be restricted by username and passwords (keeping the spammers out). It does not, however, address the issue of comment integration, nor the ability to spring from the web page into a new discussion comment.
This seems to be an all around bad idea. These tend to be little more than an HTML front-end to a "Usenet" like discussion group. It might have better display, but the functionality is less than most news readers.
This could show some promise, but the major problem, as I see it, is people would be allowed to edit the original document, rather than carry on a discussion about the merits and pitfalls of the document. A wiki is better suited to creating content, not discussing existing content.
There do exist some benefits with the way I am doing things. For one, the web does present a wonderful way of rendering documents. It also provides a good way to archive the data and allow anyone to read it at any time. It is a known medium and metaphor, thus people need little time to adjust to it. I am afraid to say I care about the form and format of my documents as well as their content. A purely "Usenet" method would not allow me the form I can get with my web sites. Furthermore, [some] web browsers offer greater options to viewing documents, as opposed to news readers.
I am inclined to have a news server setup on my own system as a method for discussions that can take place outside of timelines (IRC chats are a good place for discussion, but that assumes the people who wish to participate can take the time to do so at the time it happens, and it also assumes the participants can think and type fast). I would still like to have a method of integrating a reader into my web sites, so people can browse the messages being posted, and this still presents me with a dilemma of web based UI for this.
An interesting thought I have been kicking around (though I doubt I will be able to execute it) is to use OpenPG keys to identify people. If their signature is in the keyring they will have access to post, otherwise they will only be able to read (or not). This strikes me as an interesting way of "moderating" conversations. I'm not sure what merit it might have, but it is something I would like to consider, debate, and discuss. (There is something about cryptography that excites me.)