Editing Internet forum (section)

===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>