What, in your opinion, are the primary driving factors behind the prolific AI content we see on this platform (i.e., PMC, Blog, and Articles)?

Proxy-shilling is a messy grey-zone-type engagement approach if institutionalized. So, I’ve appreciated that our Community Engagement Specialists (and other PMI’ers) are driving some precision topics on AI. However, if one of the purposes of this engagement was to focus community responses and questions on AI (i.e., reduce the shrapnel activity), then it may not be working. In other words, it may, in actuality, have the impact of increasing the number of threads on the subject due to “social comfortness” factors.

It may be helpful to “pin” an “AI Reference” subject to the top of PMC that includes some information and links on the subject (e.g., the PMI “Artificial Intelligence in Project Management”). If well-written, this pinned content would direct folks to these other resources and then point them to create a post in PMC if they had further questions.

Just a thought.

Not to get too meta here, but it would be interesting to use an AI tool as a filter on new discussions, especially AI related ones. If a member posts a new thread related to AI, the tool would check for a matching, existing thread, and politely suggest to the member that they comment on the existing one rather than creating a new one...

Having tested and refined it on AI-related threads, the tool could then be extended to ALL discussion topics which would vastly improve the signal:noise ratio.

The next refinement would be to automatically cull "I agree with X" type comments on posts :-)

Kiron

Not to get too meta here, but it would be interesting to use an AI tool as a filter on new discussions, especially AI related ones. If a member posts a new thread related to AI, the tool would check for a matching, existing thread, and politely suggest to the member that they comment on the existing one rather than creating a new one...

Having tested and refined it on AI-related threads, the tool could then be extended to ALL discussion topics which would vastly improve the signal:noise ratio.

The next refinement would be to automatically cull "I agree with X" type comments on posts :-)

Kiron

Proxy-shilling is a messy grey-zone-type engagement approach if institutionalized. So, I’ve appreciated that our Community Engagement Specialists (and other PMI’ers) are driving some precision topics on AI. However, if one of the purposes of this engagement was to focus community responses and questions on AI (i.e., reduce the shrapnel activity), then it may not be working. In other words, it may, in actuality, have the impact of increasing the number of threads on the subject due to “social comfortness” factors.

It may be helpful to “pin” an “AI Reference” subject to the top of PMC that includes some information and links on the subject (e.g., the PMI “Artificial Intelligence in Project Management”). If well-written, this pinned content would direct folks to these other resources and then point them to create a post in PMC if they had further questions.

Just a thought.

Unfortunately, I don't think better guidelines would do much more than provide a termporarily warm fuzzy feeling that "We tried." It is almost a universal truth that quality safeguards which depend on people reading and following instructions don't work, and doubly so on internet message boards.

As a veteran of various forums over many years, I sometimes feel like I should get a big tattoo in Gothic calligraphy that reads: Munus Quaerere Utere (use the search function).

Dear George
It's the mainstream
You can't stop the wind with your hands
We have to fill the sails :-)

Hi Luis,

When the winds of change are unpredictable, the voice of pragmatism offers its advice: disengage from the helm and allow the knowledge of past explorations the ability to guide the ship to the next port of call. From there, you can recalibrate your navigation system and take on supplies and fuel to ensure success in reaching your final destination.

In other words, a straight line isn’t always the shortest distance between two points.

Either way, I have no teeth in the game; I’m just offering food for thought.

Dear George
Thank you and appreciate your posts, comments and/or questions
Help us think

To what extent does what we learned in the past help us navigate the unknown waters of the future?

Okay, Luis,

If you want to know what makes me tick in this regard, here’s the principle:

- All things, animate and inanimate, exist within a lifecycle, a pattern, that demands fulfillment. Hence, the secret to understanding the future is deciphering the patterns demanded from the past.

A bit deep, but stated in practical terms: Unveiling the past allows one to predict the future.

Why? Lifecycle patterns exist for replication, at least until you are dealing with project management, which, in that case, all bets are off. ;)