Discussions among a specific community (ie. DWebLAM discussions about IPFS for Libraries Archives and Museums, as proposed in this github comment )
I lean towards putting this stuff in discourse under a categroies like ‘Communities’ and ‘Announcements’ or, if a community is really prolific, give them their own category like ‘Libraries and Archives on IPFS’ or ‘Social Data on IPFS’
Tags is a good addition and helpful in many cases.
However, I’m not overly sold on creating categories for everything. If we end up with one category for every possible subject, we’ll end up with many categories but few threads in each topic.
If we instead have a few selected categories and wait for more content before opening up new categories (organic creation of categories if you will), the forum will appear having more content.
So instead of having “Philadelphia Users” as a category now, we should start with a “IPFS Users” category, and if we see that it make sense to create city-specific categories in the future, when the demand is there.
I think it’s important to allow these kinds of local groups to have conversations among themselves so that people can form local support networks.
The Philadelphia-Users category is an alternative to setting up some other channel for local communications – so no slack team, no mailing list, etc for the local group – discuss.ipfs.io will be the main place for all the local chatter, requests for support, discussions about planning meetups, etc. By creating a category that’s configured to be excluded from the main landing page, we
allow that local community to chatter among themselves without flooding the main channel
make those discussions visible to anyone interested in IPFS who might be curious about local groups, without having to join a slack team, mailing list, etc.