Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: Ken Hume] #20645 07/15/09 01:44 PM
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
OurBarns1 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
It was late last night and I had to sign off... Let me explain what I mean by getting rid of the Archive Section.

By all means we should keep what's there. But from here on out, I'm proposing we don't ever "retire" a thread to that section or anywhere else. Archived threads can't be re-opened, etc. Why kill a seemingly-dead thread? New members may come along and want to add to or discuss them.

I like what's happened w/ Norther Hewer's "Historic Hewing Questionnaire." This massive thread is what I'm proposing for a model. Currently, this forum is extremely broad. Perhaps too broad. Norther Hewer's thread has been a catch-all for all things broadaxe and hewing.

Instead of forum categories like "General Forum Questions," "Barns and Traditional TF," "This Old Building," etc, maybe we should be fine-tuning the categories and don't let threads w/in them ever become "archived" (shelved).

Some "new" categories might be:

Scribe Rule
Covered Bridges
Tying Joints
Pegs
SketchUp / Frame Design
Raising A Frame
Dating a structure
Wall Plates
Saw Marks (young and old)
Milling timbers
Hewing
Tools for Sale
Jowled Posts
Square Rule
Pricing Jobs
Conferences
Hundegger / CNC
Wood Finishes
Wood Science
Scarf Joinery
Restoring & Repair
Boring Machines
Slicks & Chisels
Axes & Throwing
Frame Enclosure Systems
Mortise & Tenons
Nails & Fasteners
Building Surveys
Staging
Shop Layout & Design
etc
etc
etc


Of course, this is just a start. (Holy Cow!! TF is a huge field!!) There would still be the need for catch-all categories, but my point is, I think we would be better served if the forum got more specific. This would also aid in searching out information. Just go to a category of interest and start poking around. Perhaps, too, there should be a way to petition the moderator to add a category (quickly and easily) if someone had the need (like Cupolas, etc). The moderator would also be able to suggest an existing category for the topic as well.

I don't know what the Forum has for space constraints or financial concerns, (please enlighten us Joel) but maybe there needs to be a small fee attached ($5 month) to using this service that would help the forum grow. Maybe new users could get their first month free to try out our little online treasure trove, but would then need to pony up some support to stay long term.

Food for thought.





Don Perkins
Member, TFG


to know the trees...


Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: OurBarns1] #20656 07/16/09 01:47 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 895
daiku Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 895
I'll weigh in here with my personal opinions.

I don't feel there is so much traffic on this forum that we need to subdivide to such a fine extent in order to confine my reading to just those sections that interest me. Personally, I find the traffic level so low that I can simply read all the posts. So the hierarchy isn't a problem for me.

And as much as I admire Richard (aka Northern Hewer) and his amazing accumulated knowledge, I actually don't like threads that go on forever wandering from topic to topic. I would have preferred to see several threads in the tools form.

Perhaps what you are envisioning is some sort of timber framing encyclopedia, which I am all in favor of, but should be done with wiki technology, not a discussion board. And as far as being able to easily find information on a certain topic, the search feature works for that.

Regarding the archives, as far as I know, the only things in there are posts from the old system which could not be migrated. I don't think current threads ever get pushed down there, do they?

If I'm correct about the archive, and you find a gem down there that you want to resurrect, I don't see why you couldn't start a new thread and then copy and paste in the old posts to start, and then carry on. In other words, perform a by-hand migration of the best topics, since there was no way to do mass migration using a power tool.

Joel, am I correct about the archive? CB.



--
Clark Bremer
Minneapolis
Proud Member of the TFG
Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: daiku] #20659 07/16/09 02:22 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
B
bmike Offline
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
Agree with Clark. I think the broad categories work well enough. There just isn't the traffic here to spit hairs down to DNA level. And adding way to many categories will only confuse new folks to the forum - "Do I put this in 'traditional barn joinery cut with stone?" or "Do I put this in 'modern undersquinted CAD designed metal pinned scarf cut with period correct Japanese hand tools?" I think it adds a whole level of confusion. Currently we can't even keep on topic in a single thread.

If the TFG did anything it might move this to a more powerful forum system that offered tagging, keywords, sorting, etc. etc.

But, when I only see 1.2 new posts a day (depending if its busy season or if we are arguing about technology ruining our craft) it seems silly to further divide this up.

A good way to work on the problem would be to actually develop the forum guidelines and self police a bit (this would require actually reading the forum guidelines to begin with). There should be ways for moderators to move and to split threads into new posts, and folks should start new topics when things change so much the subject line no longer applies.

But again, until traffic picks up - I don't see it as a necessity.

And yes, a Wiki would be good. Didn't we start one of those somewhere? Wasn't there a long thread about it? wink


Mike Beganyi Design and Consulting, LLC.
www.mikebeganyi.com
Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: bmike] #20660 07/16/09 02:38 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 344
Joel McCarty Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 344
Absolutely correct.

I do think the Wiki format offers distinct advantages over the threaded forum format.

I can make such a thing go live today if I get a little encouragement.

However, I would like to encourage all of YOU.

Please consider creating an account for yourselves at wikipedia.org so that you can edit the page on timber framing.


Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: Joel McCarty] #20669 07/17/09 02:24 AM
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
OurBarns1 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
Hmmm....

The lack of posting (low traffic) here might very well be because this forum needs a better and more engaging blueprint.

Most of the threads here are little more than excuses to fire up our computers and just "go online." No offense, but the current format is not producing that many insights. There are exceptions, but we might all agree that the majority is mediocre. Oh well. The point is we can change this.

This "discussion forum" is good for banter, and I enjoy this as much as the next guy, but as a Guild, that professes to further the education and dissemination of the craft, why not take it up a notch? We have more resources than we may realize.

The Forum is vastly underutilized. Now that many are visiting the TFG online and internet audiences continue to grow throughout the world, we have some real potential here to share and learn. There are members stopping by from a few countries...What might have taken weeks to explore/discuss can now be shared (and documented) in days. Maybe we are wondering about the range of the distrubution of jowled posts, kigpost trusses, or the later (last) dates of scribe rule frames in different regions?

Please Joel, as you say, "make such a thing go live today."

And let's get TTRAG to use this forum (drag them kicking and screaming) or whatever wiki that might work out. It's the most potent tool they have yet to use. A case in point: I remember Jan Lewandowski's ad on the back of a Scantlings issue this spring. It had a picture of a certian kind of marriage mark. I think it was a "goose foot" or something. He wanted to know if others had seen similar marks. I just shook my head... If he had posted this in a category titled "Marriage Marks" (in a re-designed forum or wiki) he may have actually had a chance at some real research that everyone could have benefitted from. Relying on mailings sent soley to Guild members is a sure way to hobble real research in the internet age.

If there's a role I might personally play in gathering TTRAGers, or helping to format a wiki/forum page, I'm offering to do so. I don't expect Mr. McCarty to do everything.

I raise my glass to future discoveries !!



Don Perkins
Member, TFG


to know the trees...


Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: OurBarns1] #20672 07/17/09 10:21 AM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
K
Ken Hume Offline
Member
Offline
Member
K
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 959
Hi Guys,

I am pleased to hear that some of the regular posters want to take the forum to the next level whatever that might be. Technology would appear to have a habit of continually moving onwards and so we can either decide to hop on board for the journey or sit by the wayside and watch everyone else move ahead into the distance.

I do think that we are about to enter a sea change and hopefully that might well promote more joined up thinking and sharing of experiences where that is at all possible.

I accept that there needs to be a necessary balance between being light and heavy but from Don's comments above and from examining the forum's regular poster listings it would appear that many of the people who might be able to make heavyweight contributions seem to elect to stay away and it would be really important to understand why this is the case ?

Regards

Ken Hume


Looking back to see the way ahead !
Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: Ken Hume] #20673 07/17/09 12:43 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 344
Joel McCarty Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 344
Gents,

Archived forums were the casualty of technological progress.

However, if you take a look at the General Forum Questions heading on the Forums home page, you will now notice a sub-forum. I was able to move the General Archive, and make it searchable, and ready to accept posts.

Let me know if this move has value.

If we were to start a Wiki on a single topic, just to experiment with the form, and to see if we have the discipline to play well in the Wiki world, what would that topic be?



Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: Joel McCarty] #20675 07/17/09 01:38 PM
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
OurBarns1 Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 570
Found the sub-category. Thanks for the legwork. I think it does have value, however it's hard to find, especially for new visitors, and we can't reply to these old threads. Clark's earlier suggestion on cutting/pasting/migrating into an entirely new post would work I suppose.

Joel, can this wiki you propose accept new posts by us, or must the moderator select the topics each time?

As far as a starter topic, why not marriage marks? Might even get a TTRAGer to stop by grin

And this leads back to Ken's question: why aren't the heavyweights participating here?

I think enriching the forum has two parts:

1. Revising the blueprint

2. Advertising to enthusiasts and scholars that it's available (probably the most important piece).

Many long-time guild members may be stuck in the tradition of conferences and mailings as their sole communication w/ the Guild, which is quite limiting when you look at the potential of the internet.

.................................................

As far as intimidating newcomers, that long list of specific categories I proposed upthread might actually lead to MORE interest among us. Many may be unaware of the depth of the trade. For instance, before I joined the Forum I had no idea there was such a thing as scribe and square rule (thought the tradition was all scribe). I guess if I'd seen the potential here (a long list of specific categories) on my first visits, I would have been more intrigued than intimidated.

I realize none of this will happen overnight... also curious what other folks might propose as a starter wiki topic.





Don Perkins
Member, TFG


to know the trees...


Re: Forum re-design (All a'Twitter) [Re: OurBarns1] #20677 07/17/09 07:50 PM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
B
bmike Offline
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 918
Also, lets not forget that some folks work at a computer or a chisel or a chain mortiser day in and day out. Sitting down to argue or share the fineries and experience of their trade and craft may not be the first thing they think of when they get home in the evening... usually dinner with the family, story time with the little one, a bike ride, and the rest of life is also important.



And lets remember also that this forum costs the TFG $$ to keep running - regardless of who is or isn't posting to it.

Raise a glass to the TFG management - and while you are at it open your checkbook and your calendar. Write a check for a membership - and then schedule some time to travel to events, attend a workshop, present at a conference, take on some of the volunteer work that might need to be done... etc. etc. etc.

The saying 'You get what you pay for...' comes to mind. The more you put in - to contributing here, in the meat space, behind the scenes, or with your pocketbook enrich the whole experience.


And remember that pecking away at a computer will just never work for some folks. Its often cold, brutal, and unfriendly out in the webspace - and takes a certain commitment to stare at a screen and decipher what other folks are thinking, writing, and expressing. Some folks would rather pick up the phone and chat about it - and others have lives of their own - and blogs of their own - and companies of their own. And they may just be private people.

Last edited by bmike; 07/17/09 07:52 PM.

Mike Beganyi Design and Consulting, LLC.
www.mikebeganyi.com
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Jim Rogers, mdfinc 

Newest Members
HFT, Wrongthinker, kaymaxi, RLTJohn, fendrishi
5134 Registered Users
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3
(Release build 20190728)
PHP: 5.4.45 Page Time: 0.072s Queries: 15 (0.049s) Memory: 3.2169 MB (Peak: 3.3977 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-28 10:28:35 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS