Thread standards

FutureTank

Banned Member
There are a great many people wishing to express opinion and point of views here by commenting on various systems, resources and methods implemented in the defence sector as a result of policies implemented in the past, present or future by various decision makers.

It seems to me that it would be useful to maintain some standards that would allow for constructive thread management.

Past, present or future deployment of weapon systems, defence support resources or techniques and methods is a response to policy that seeks to mitigate a given threat.

When posting, it would be useful if threads clearly stated the following:

Forces of change causing introduction of the system, resource or method
Purpose for the policy decision
Identification and definition of core issues and problems involved in the policy
Resources or technologies to be used in design, development and implementation
Motivation for the decision
Agency of implementation
Scope and scale of implementation
Interest groups
Common myths and fears that may have influenced the decision

If you are proposing a new policy or policy change, please consider doing these first:

Recognize the different demands for policy
Understand issue emergence and policy incubation
Define underlying issues and problems
Set policy goals
Think systematically about policy design
Develop realistic options
Establish policy practice and processes
Connect implementation to the overall policy development process
Identify the key steps of implementation
Relate implementation to core tasks
Appreciate issues and problems
Analyse and make strategic choices
Think strategically about implementation
Appreciate the interrelationship between policy choice, implementation and impact
Understand the meaning of evaluation
Use different types of evaluation
Develop clear frameworks for evaluation analysis
Forecast potential policy outcomes

When substantiating any of the above, please provide appropriate data and sources that would contribute to factual and objective evaluation of your ideas by others.

Thank you :)
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
There are a great many people wishing to express opinion and point of views here by commenting on various systems, resources and methods implemented in the defence sector as a result of policies implemented in the past, present or future by various decision makers.

It seems to me that it would be useful to maintain some standards that would allow for constructive thread management.

Past, present or future deployment of weapon systems, defence support resources or techniques and methods is a response to policy that seeks to mitigate a given threat.

When posting, it would be useful if threads clearly stated the following:

Forces of change causing introduction of the system, resource or method
Purpose for the policy decision
Identification and definition of core issues and problems involved in the policy
Resources or technologies to be used in design, development and implementation
Motivation for the decision
Agency of implementation
Scope and scale of implementation
Interest groups
Common myths and fears that may have influenced the decision

If you are proposing a new policy or policy change, please consider doing these first:

Recognize the different demands for policy
Understand issue emergence and policy incubation
Define underlying issues and problems
Set policy goals
Think systematically about policy design
Develop realistic options
Establish policy practice and processes
Connect implementation to the overall policy development process
Identify the key steps of implementation
Relate implementation to core tasks
Appreciate issues and problems
Analyse and make strategic choices
Think strategically about implementation
Appreciate the interrelationship between policy choice, implementation and impact
Understand the meaning of evaluation
Use different types of evaluation
Develop clear frameworks for evaluation analysis
Forecast potential policy outcomes

When substantiating any of the above, please provide appropriate data and sources that would contribute to factual and objective evaluation of your ideas by others.

Thank you :)
Er, who died and left you boss mate? If you're not interested in a particular topic, don't join in. I am NOT going through all that rubbish every time I wish to post my opinion and I doubt VERY much that anyone else will either.

Thank you...
 

webmaster

Troll Hunter
Staff member
Thanks FutureTank.

Although, those are some serious suggestions and I appreciate you for taking your time to think about this idea.

We've always try to keep things simple and thread standards that we do have are:

When posting article thread:

- Article it self
- Your personal input and comments
- URL of the article
- no one-liners

When posting general thread (question/comments):

-No one-liners
-Detailed analysis
-Answer WHAT, WHERE, HOW, WHY, etc. before asking others (mainly in this vs that threads)
-Avoid "this vs that" threads unless you follow above three rules.

Even though, your suggestions are great, I don't think it would be wise to make things even harder and complicated for the user as well as our mod team. :)

Thanks and enjoy!
 

merocaine

New Member
Recognize the different demands for policy
Understand issue emergence and policy incubation
Define underlying issues and problems
Set policy goals
Think systematically about policy design
Develop realistic options
Establish policy practice and processes
Connect implementation to the overall policy development process
Identify the key steps of implementation
Relate implementation to core tasks
Appreciate issues and problems
Analyse and make strategic choices
Think strategically about implementation
Appreciate the interrelationship between policy choice, implementation and impact
Understand the meaning of evaluation
Use different types of evaluation
Develop clear frameworks for evaluation analysis
Forecast potential policy outcomes
I'll implement those policy guidelines in reference to thread structure in future, could I also suggest a retro active policy of thead revision with reference to the above ctirea, followed by an evaluation and analysis to see wheater the correct policy guide lines have been followed. Of course a forecast of potential policy outcomes is also welcome.

Cheers
 

FutureTank

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
Er, who died and left you boss mate? If you're not interested in a particular topic, don't join in. I am NOT going through all that rubbish every time I wish to post my opinion and I doubt VERY much that anyone else will either.

Thank you...
Its a suggestion and NOT a checklist :)
I though that the more serious I made it the more it would catch attention...may be not a good idea
 

adroth

New Member
Its a suggestion and NOT a checklist :)
I though that the more serious I made it the more it would catch attention...may be not a good idea
I can understand where your coming from FutureTank. However, I've seen WebMaster put people in their place, so I'm confident this place won't go to the dogs.

Your criteria, however, left out the interests of people of myself who are here to learn; to find out how other countries do things. I personally prefer to post questions, rather than commentary.
 

webmaster

Troll Hunter
Staff member
I can understand where your coming from FutureTank. However, I've seen WebMaster put people in their place, so I'm confident this place won't go to the dogs.

Your criteria, however, left out the interests of people of myself who are here to learn; to find out how other countries do things. I personally prefer to post questions, rather than commentary.

Hey, we've tried to keep the rules of the game very simple for everyone. However, if someone wants to follow these just because they are nice or organized, then so be it. IMHO, these are some serious suggestions and I do not think everyone would be up to the task to follow nor would I want to put my self or our Mod team in position to enforce such standards. The criteria to write posts and threads is simple as I've written above but if you want to go the extra mile, please do.
 
Top