# How to seperate the "drive by" topics from the "deeper" discussions? **URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/how-to-seperate-the-drive-by-topics-from-the-deeper-discussions/68222 **Category:** Community Building **Created:** [August 17, 2017, 11:13am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/how-to-seperate-the-drive-by-topics-from-the-deeper-discussions/68222 "2017-08-17T11:13:39Z") **Posts on this page:** 1 **Showing post:** 34
### Author: ![angus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/angus/32/341715_2.png) [@angus](https://meta.discourse.org/u/angus) #### Post date: [April 2, 2024, 9:44am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/how-to-seperate-the-drive-by-topics-from-the-deeper-discussions/68222/34 "2024-04-02T09:44:13Z")
Someone recently liked one of my posts in this topic, which prompted me to re-read it. Re-reading a discussion from 7 years ago can be a strange and fun experience, both for the things you’ve forgotten you said, and also what the passage of time brings (e.g. I’m not sure that HAWK and Dave were working for Discourse in 2017, and are now, respectively co-CEO and Product Manager. This was also before I started Pavilion). One might say that the “discussion archeology” opportunities that forums afford are one of their strengths. Relatedly, I’ve been meaning to look into the recent addition of the “hot” topic list ([added in this commit](https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/ebd3971533793f83db0efab27c65a7e60aa5e72b)), and re-reading the above gave some impetus. The [notes in the code](https://github.com/discourse/discourse/blob/main/app/models/topic_hot_score.rb) provide a useful equation for the hot algorithm: > (total likes - 1) / (age in hours + 2) ^ gravity There’s some discussion of this addition in the topic announcing it > [@Discover popular conversations in your community with Hot topic sorting](https://meta.discourse.org/t/discover-popular-conversations-in-your-community-with-hot-topic-sorting/296747): > > Keeping up with the content in active communities can be challenging. Outside of reading everything created in your community, how can you be sure that you’re reading what’s resonating most with your members? Introducing Hot, the newest topic sorting option that helps you discover what’s currently trending in your community based on recent likes and lively discussions. Think of it like the trusty Latest filter, but a bit smarter — Hot helps you discover content that is recent and resonant with … I want to preface my comments on the hot topic list with the observation that they’re essentially thought bubbles and that I agree with Lindsey’s overview of how the product utility of the Hot list (or any other topic list) should be determined: > [@Discover popular conversations in your community with Hot topic sorting](https://meta.discourse.org/t/discover-popular-conversations-in-your-community-with-hot-topic-sorting/296747/25): > > There’s a series of questions that I’d like us to be able to answer: Is Hot valuable as its designed today as a homepage on Meta? It Hot valuable as its designed today as a homepage for any types of communities? Is Hot valuable as its designed today in general? We can answer these questions by: Talking to users on Meta about their experience with Hot as the default homepage on Meta. Polling admins about their use of Hot in their communities, as a homepage and as a general sorting option. Ge… That said, here are some things that come to mind out of the intersection of this old discussion and the new Hot topics list: - I wonder if “taxonomies” could be optionally used to weight the hot algorithm, i.e. a certain category or tag may get a lot of activity (e.g. likes), but you (the forum admin) consider that “shallower”, or less desirable in some way, than activity in another category or tag. In other words, adding in more site-specific discovery curation. - I wonder what a topic list contextualised to user variables (e.g. trust level, the prior topic views of that user) would look like / how it would behave. In other words, adding in more user-specific automated / algorithmic curation. In other words: > [@angus](#): > > In addition to improving each system independently, some interesting avenues arise when you think about the connections between them, e.g. > > - Taxonomy + Trust + Visibility: e.g. A topic list that ranked based taxonomic variables of the topic and trust variables of the posters, in addition to likes. This could split the difference between hiding the ‘sandbox’ / support category and letting it pollute your homepage. > … --- _[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/how-to-seperate-the-drive-by-topics-from-the-deeper-discussions/68222)._