Editing Internet forum (section)

==Purpose==
Online discussion platforms can engage people in collective reflection and exchanging perspectives and cross-cultural understanding.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Deng|first1=Liping|last2=Chen|first2=Yang-Hsueh|last3=Li|first3=Sandy C.|title=Supporting cross-cultural online discussion with formal and informal platforms: a case between Hong Kong and Taiwan|journal=Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning|date=23 January 2017|volume=12|issue=1|pages=5|doi=10.1186/s41039-017-0050-z|pmid=30613254|pmc=6302850|language=En|issn=1793-7078 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Public display of ideas can encourage intersubjective meaning making.<ref>{{cite book|last1=O'Malley|first1=Claire|title=Computer Support Collaborative Learining Practices: CSCL2009 Conference Proceedings|date=2009|publisher=Lulu.com|isbn=9781615841370|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4smfAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA114|accessdate=26 July 2017|language=en}}</ref>{{Self-published inline|date=December 2017}}

Online discussion platforms may be an important structural means for effective large-scale participation.<ref name=mano/>

===In education===
{{See also|Educational technology|Edutainment|Massive open online course}}
Online discussion platforms can play a role in education.<ref>{{cite book|title=The Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference 2013, Volume 2|date=23 April 2014 |publisher=Lulu.com|isbn=9781483406671|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ydywBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA157|accessdate=26 July 2017|language=en}}</ref>{{Self-published inline|date=December 2017}} In recent years, online discussion platform have become a significant part of not only [[distance education]] but also in campus-based settings.<ref>{{cite book|title=Hybrid Learning: Innovation in Educational Practices - 8th {{!}} Simon K.S. Cheung {{!}} Springer|url=https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319206202|accessdate=26 July 2017|language=en|isbn=9783319206202 |last1=Cheung |first1=Simon K. S. |last2=Kwok |first2=Lam-for |last3=Yang |first3=Harrison |last4=Fong |first4=Joseph |last5=Kwan |first5=Reggie |date=29 June 2015 |publisher=Springer }}</ref>

The proposed interactive e-learning community (iELC) is a platform that engages physics students in online and classroom learning tasks. In brief classroom discussions fundamental physics formulas, definitions and concepts are  disclosed, after which students participate in the iELC form discussion and utilize chat and dialogue tools to improve their understanding of the subject. The teacher then discusses selected forum posts in the subsequent classroom session.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Wong|first1=Su Luan|last2=Abu Bakar|first2=Kamariah|title=Qualitative findings of students' perception on practice of self-regulated strategies in online community discussion|journal=Computers & Education|date=1 August 2009|volume=53|issue=1|pages=94–103|doi=10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.021|url=http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/7650/1/Qualitative%20findings%20of%20students%20perception%20on%20practice%20of%20Self%20regulated%20strategies%20in%20online%20community%20discussion.pdf}}</ref>

Classroom online discussion platforms are one type of such platforms.<ref>{{cite journal|title= Participation, interaction, and academic achievement in an online discussion environment|journal= Computers & Education|volume=84|pages=78–89|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272239937|accessdate=27 July 2017|language=en|doi=10.1016/j.compedu.2015.01.008|year=2015|last1=Zheng|first1=Binbin|last2=Warschauer|first2=Mark}}</ref>

Rose argues that the basic motivation for the development of e–learning platforms is efficiency of scale — teaching more students for less money.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Coopman|first1=Stephanie J.|title=A critical examination of Blackboard's e-learning environment|journal=First Monday|date=17 May 2009|volume=14|issue=6|doi=10.5210/fm.v14i6.2434|url=http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2434/2202|accessdate=26 July 2017|language=en |doi-access= free|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

A study found that learners will enhance the frequencies of course discussion and actively interact with e-learning platform when e-learning platform integrates the curriculum reward mechanism into learning activities.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Lan|first1=Yu-Feng|last2=Yang|first2=Chia-Lung|title=2009 IEEE International Conference on Virtual Environments, Human-Computer Interfaces and Measurements Systems |chapter=A practical approach to encourage students participation in asynchronous online discussions based on expectancy theory |pages=271–276|doi=10.1109/VECIMS.2009.5068907|date=May 2009|isbn=978-1-4244-3808-2|s2cid=23457961}}</ref>

===In smart cities===
"City townhall" includes a participation platform for policy-making in [[Rotterdam]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Janssen|first1=Marijn|last2=Kuk|first2=George|last3=Wagenaar|first3=René W.|title=A survey of Web-based business models for e-government in the Netherlands|journal=Government Information Quarterly|date=1 April 2008|volume=25|issue=2|pages=202–220|doi=10.1016/j.giq.2007.06.005}}</ref>{{additional citation needed|date=July 2017}}

In 2022, [[United Nations]] reported that D-Agree Afghanistan is used as a digital and smart city solutions in [[Afghanistan]].<ref name=Un2022>{{cite report |title=Regional Commissions report on the progress on the Implementation of the New Urban Agenda (2019-2022)|date=2022 |publisher=United Nations |page=19|url=https://www.un.org/ecosoc/sites/www.un.org.ecosoc/files/files/en/2022doc/UNECE-QR-report.pdf}}</ref><ref name=Thetrans2022>{{cite report |title=The Transition of Asian and Pacific Cities to a Sustainable Future:Accelerating Action for Sustainable Urbanization|date=2022 |publisher=Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific|page=23|url=https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/knowledge-products/Regional-Partners-Forum-Outcome-Report-20220318.pdf}}</ref>  D-Agree is a discussion support platform with [[artificial intelligence]]–based facilitation.<ref name=HadfiHaqbeenSahabIto2021>{{cite journal |last1=Hadfi |first1=Rafik |last2=Haqbeen |first2=Jawad |last3=Sahab |first3=Sofia |last4=Ito |first4=Takayuki |date=August 2021 |title=Argumentative conversational agents for online discussions |journal=Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering |volume=30 |issue=4 |pages=450–464 |doi=10.1007/s11518-021-5497-1 |pmid=34054250 |pmc=8143987}}</ref> The discussion trees in D-Agree, inspired by [[issue-based information system]], contain a combination of four types of elements: issues, ideas, pros, and cons.<ref name=HadfiHaqbeenSahabIto2021/> The software extracts a discussion's structure in real time based on IBIS, automatically classifying all the sentences.<ref name=HadfiHaqbeenSahabIto2021/>

===Streamlining===
Online discussion platforms may be designed and improved to streamline discussions for efficiency, usefulness and quality. For instance voting, targeted notifications, user levels, [[gamification]], subscriptions, bots, discussion requirements, structurization, layout, sorting, linking, feedback-mechanisms, reputation-features, demand-signaling features, requesting-features, visual highlighting, separation, curation, tools for real-time collaboration, tools for mobilization of humans and resources, standardization, data-processing, segmentation, summarization, moderation, time-intervals, categorization/tagging, rules and indexing can be leveraged in synergy to improve the platform.{{citation needed|date=July 2017}}

In 2013 Sarah Perez claimed that the best platform for online discussion doesn't yet exist, noting that comment sections could be more useful if they showed "which comments or shares have resonated and why" and which "understands who deserves to be heard".<ref>{{cite web|last1=Perez|first1=Sarah|title=The Best Platform For Online Discussion Doesn't Exist Yet|date=22 February 2013 |publisher=TechCrunch|url=https://techcrunch.com/2013/02/21/the-best-platform-for-discussion-online-doesnt-exist-yet/|accessdate=27 July 2017}}</ref>

Online platforms don't intrinsically guarantee informed citizen input. Research demonstrates that such spaces can even undermine deliberative participation when they allow hostile, superficial and misinformed content to dominate the conversation (see also: [[Internet troll]], [[shitposting]]). A necessary mechanism that enables these platforms to yield informed citizen debate and contribution to policy is [[deliberation]]. It is argued that the challenge lies in creating an online context that does not merely aggregate public input but promotes informed public discussion that may benefit the policy-making process.<ref name=mano>{{cite journal|last1=Manosevitch|first1=Edith|last2=Steinfeld|first2=Nili|last3=Lev-On|first3=Azi|title=Promoting online deliberation quality: cognitive cues matter|journal=Information, Communication & Society|date=26 November 2014|volume=17|issue=10|pages=1177–1195|doi=10.1080/1369118X.2014.899610|s2cid=145777013|issn=1369-118X}}</ref>

Online citizen communication has been studied for an evaluations of how deliberative their content is and how selective perception and ideological fragmentation play a role in them (see also: [[filter bubble]]).
One sub-branch of online deliberation research is dedicated to the development of new platforms that "facilitate deliberative experiences that surpass currently available options".<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Freelon|first1=Deen|title=Discourse architecture, ideology, and democratic norms in online political discussion|journal=New Media & Society|date=1 May 2015|volume=17|issue=5|pages=772–791|doi=10.1177/1461444813513259|s2cid=37565851|language=en|issn=1461-4448}}</ref>