Makes sense to me.↵
'Discussions' is a much broader term than 'problems and their solutions.'↵
So I can see how that would allow for greater freedom.↵
I can also imagine some of the challenges presented in prior iterations of Veritula, if it had more of a 'problems and their solutions' structure.↵
Perhaps some of this theory of problem-solving just shared can make it into 'How Does Veritula Work?'↵
To be clear, I'm not opposed to 'trees' in general.  I was wondering whether 'discussion trees' can be replaced with 'problems-and-their-solutions trees' (for lack of a better phrasing).↵
And yes, I do think discussions can map onto the structure I suggest.↵
So, no worries.  I was wondering whether the 'Discussion Titles' can draw in current and future users in a more frictionless manner with problem statements.  ↵
But if it was tried before, why try it again?  Thanks.

 4 unchanged lines collapsed
Perhaps some of this theory of problem-solving just shared can make it into 'How Does Veritula Work?'↵
To be clear, I'm not opposed to 'trees' in general.  I was wondering whether 'discussion trees' can be replaced with 'problems-and-their-solutions trees' (for lack of a better phrasing).↵
And yes,Work?'↵
Yes, I do think discussions can map onto the structure I suggest.
So, no worries.  I was wondering whether the 'Discussion Titles' can draw in current and future users in a more frictionless manner with problem statements.  
But if it was tried before, why try it again?  Thanks.