Forum OpenACS Q&A: New forum suggestions ...

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/27/02 02:21 AM

OK ... continuing last week's thread, Torben and Malte both submitted proposed names and "about" sections for three new forums:

OpenACS Evangelism Forum
OpenACS End-User Support Forum
OpenACS Admin's Forum or OpenACS IMplementor's Forum or ...

I haven't put the descriptions up because my theory in naming forums is that if their purpose isn't clear, folks will mispost because they'll never read the description even if we beat them over the head with it.

The first two seem clear. The last forum name isn't really obvious and Torben and I decided we should ask for help choosing a name. Torben's description to go with it:

for graphics designers, webmasters, administrators and others who want to install, configure, or manage the operation of existing versions of OpenACS. Get help with: customizing templates, graphics and other internet media; making adp webpages (html, dhtml, css) or embedding small TCL scripts; managing user permissions; importing data; working with XML and published scripts; modifying default configurations; and otherwise keeping the system performing well. (For improving the OpenACS system, refer to the developers' forums.)

The description's great, but we need a name that when read brings something like this description to mind.

Any ideas?

If we can settle the name issues I think we can move forward and create the forums.

2: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Stephen . on 07/27/02 02:46 AM

Name: OpenACS Q&A

Seriously, if that type of wide ranging discussion is to take place in the new un-named forum, what's left to discuss in the existing long-standing forum?

Maybe an 'about' description is in order for OpenACS Q&A before names are decided.

3: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by David Siktberg on 07/27/02 03:36 AM

How about OpenACS Content Developers and Site Administrators Forum. Paired with a forum named something like OpenACS Infrastructure and Toolkit (or System?) Developers Forum, it might be reasonably clear which was appropriate for a given topic.

4: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Paul Doerwald on 07/27/02 03:24 PM

I prefer fewer forums with more categories. If there are ways to read just messages in categories we're interested in, that allows a place for "off-topic" posts.

5: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/27/02 06:45 PM

Well ... we've already had the discussion regarding whether or not we should have new forums, and there's a fairly broad consensus that we should have these three forums. We've also discussed folding the specific OpenACS 4 design and test forums into a general openacs development forum. Which makes this one obsolete, I guess.

content developers and site administrators forum ... I'll ask Torben what he thinks.

6: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/27/02 06:45 PM

We may just want to wait until the new 4.x-based openacs.org site is up, come to think of it. They seem to be on pace for a mid-August launch.

7: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Reuven Lerner on 07/27/02 09:13 PM

Maybe it's just me, but I'm not sure who the "End-User Support Forum" is meant for, if the third forum is meant for those writing ADP pages, customizing templates, and working with graphics.

When you say "end user," do you mean, "developer" or "person using an OpenACS site"? Or someone who plans to install and use existing OpenACS packages, but not modify them much? Or someone who wants to create their own APMs?

Part of the problem is that I'm not sure who is a "user," and who has some other role.

Meanwhile, I think that "OpenACS site designers and administrators" summarizes Torben's text, even if it's a mouthful.

8: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Torben Brosten on 07/27/02 09:21 PM

"content developers and site administrators forum ..." --David Siktberg

Don, David, et al,

Two requirements come to mind:

1. Are titles reflected directly in the url, or can shortened names represent the forum in the url?

If using this title means that urls pointing to threads in the forum will look something like: https://openacs.org/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0005RO&topic_id=11&topic=content%20developers%20and%20site%20administrators then the name is too long.

2. The title of the forum should be identical to the name of the part of documentation that addresses the same areas (for consistency).

If a consensus is made for this name, then the "Part II. For OpenACS Admins" (see Table of Contents at https://openacs.org/doc/openacs-4/ ) should be renamed to "Part II. For OpenACS Content Developers and Site Administrators"

My thoughts:

I like David Siktberg's suggestion. Maybe we can shorten it. Really, the forum (and docs in this area) deal with more than "developing" content --applying, managing and integrating content for example. In fact, what's done with content might be similar to what's done with an active OpenACS site --administering it. Creating new standards and digital representation of content (as in new MIME types and graphics types) isn't really a part of the topic. What if we shorten the title to: "content and site administrators forum"

Or.. abbreviating it, let's consider:

"Content and Site Admins Forum"

This seems to represent the spirit of the forum to me. What do you think?

9: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Torben Brosten on 07/27/02 09:37 PM

Hi Reuven,

To answer your question, the End-Users Forum description is (hope this is the right revision I'm posting):

OpenACS End-User Support Forum for (nontechnical) end-users. This forum serves managers, business analysts, professionals, and the rest of us who want to ask questions, post ideas and otherwise discuss OpenACS without technical explanations or requiring computer expertise.

10: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/28/02 07:46 PM

Torben - I like your shortened name. If we wait until the launch of the OpenACS 4.x-based openacs.org then forums should be indentified by their object_id in the URL, not their full name. Can someone verify this is true?

11: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Ola Hansson on 07/28/02 10:28 PM

That is correct Don. The forums are represented by their object ids.

12: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Ola Hansson on 07/28/02 10:40 PM

Oh, and if you think we'll loose momentum by holding off these new forums until mid August, feel free to create them on the current site anytime before that point.

We have already migrated the current topics and messages, etc, but we will re-run the migration scripts just when we switch to the new site in order to pick up new users, topics, messages, subscriptions and so forth...

13: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/28/02 10:51 PM

Unless we hear some very, very strong objections I favor waiting until the new site comes up in mid-August. Fresh start, fresh forums, why not?

But if anyone strongly objects, I'm listening ...

14: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Jonathan Ellis on 07/29/02 05:09 PM

I don't see enough evangelism traffic to justify a separate forum. I think this topic at least should stay in the general/misc forum; a nearly-empty forum seems like a ghost town.

15: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Talli Somekh on 07/29/02 05:12 PM

Yes, I certainly agree with Jonathon. In fact, I might go so far as to suggest that each of these new forums have a trial period to make sure that there is enough traffic or that they are used enough to justify their existence.

talli

16: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Don Baccus on 07/29/02 06:05 PM

(sigh) we had an ENTIRE THREAD about this and in that thread there was a lot of public participation and a request for such a forum.

If people insist on revisiting and revisiting the issue someone else is going to have to take responsibility for listening and implementing whatever comes out of the discussion. I let that last thread run until it appeared there was consensus.

17: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Jonathan Ellis on 07/29/02 06:13 PM

you should know by now that what users say they want isn't necessarily what they really want. :)

18: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Reuven Lerner on 07/29/02 10:12 PM

Don, you're never going to get complete consensus on this issue.

We definitely need a forum for designers and administrators. We definitely need a forum for end users. I'm not sure if we need a forum for evangelism -- but it can't hurt, and it might help a lot, especially as OpenACS begins to gain ground. (And besides, such a forum is almost mandatory in the open-source world.)

The existence of these forums has been debated long enough; it's time to take action, and then fix whatever problems might occur as a result.

19: Sir Winston Churchill once said, give me the tools and I'll finsih the job (response to 1)

Posted by Ben Koot on 07/29/02 10:31 PM

The tools are there. Given the fact it takes about 1 minute to put a forum on-line, I don't realy see what this debate is all about. Once it's there the folks that are interested will be able to mange things, However, it might mean someone has to act as a moderator, because that's te trigger that activates the bboard system. I can imagine Don and ben are allready swamped and don't fancy another job in this respect, so all we need to know is who will act as admin.

If the title is not right, or the intentions have to be modified, this is a matter of changing the text in the board's admin panel. We realy don't need to design a new bboard to get things moving folks. I do this day in and day out, as I am never satisfied with my own ideas!! If it doesn't work, just disable the forum. No need for consensus, let's just get on with our work. At least this is NOT a technical issue, it's default OACS fucntionality... Allow users to add their own forum. Please folks, can we move on.

I realy look forward to move OACS to the next generation usability, with thousands of satisfied users, never fussing about technoloical challenges.

Cheers

20: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Jonathan Ellis on 07/29/02 10:43 PM

I'm not sure if we need a forum for evangelism -- but it can't hurt...

It very well CAN hurt. A forum created before there is insufficient activity to justify it will actually DECREASE discussion in that area, because users go there and, seeing no posts, think, "Huh, I guess nobody is interested in this after all. Never mind." I've seen this happen many, many times.

The existence of these forums has been debated long enough; it's time to take action, and then fix whatever problems might occur as a result.

Funny, I've always been a fan of, "If it ain't broke, ..."

21: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Ben Koot on 07/29/02 10:45 PM

I think we could save a lot of time and effort by modifying the fucntionality of the new OACS site in this respect. If we don't we will keep running into this kind of discussions. Not realy a prime example of building community. It also means things that could have been solved in minutes drag on for days, and sometimes are never solved. The current bboard is full of examples.

What if... the next OACS site would feature ALL available modules, irrespective of release ( 3.5 or 4...) as a central playground, and a small group of system administrators, anybody with interesting ideas could have his/her go at things. What I mean is...

During this discussion about end-user bboards, I allready created such a setup on my own site. Isn't it plain stupid, for interested registered users at OACS to duplicate the registration on my Timedesk site. A waste of energy, a waste of time and a waste of resources. We're called open source, but it seems we're pretty closed if it comes to solving simple issues.

keep smiling 😉)

22: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Jonathan Ellis on 07/29/02 10:48 PM

Maybe I'm slow, Ben, but I really don't see what creating an OACS clone of passport has to do with creating new forums...

23: Response to New forum suggestions ... (response to 1)

Posted by Jun Yamog on 07/30/02 04:47 AM

I am ok with those forums.... or any forums. The only way we can see if things will workout if we try them. If some of the new forums does not get substantial activity then archive it or something.

A good example of none active forum is the OpenACS CMS Q&A forum. The last post is more than a year ago. Maybe its time to archive this forum or something. The same thing we should do with the new forums if they don't get activity.