English > Feature Suggestions

Reviving the Wiki

<< < (7/7)

rick.ca:

--- Quote from: patch on September 07, 2010, 11:15:41 am ---Hits PVD Wiki Home...
--- End quote ---

How many of these hits are from bots? If you believe they're all from people, how do you explain the relatively tiny number of logins and page edits?


--- Quote ---Sorry rick I do not believe it is possible for me to explain the issues to you.
--- End quote ---

That's okay. I don't need the issues explained to me. ::)


--- Quote from: CAD on September 07, 2010, 12:34:20 pm ---The argument over which is better, wiki or forum is nonsensical. They perform different functions...
--- End quote ---

The fact we're having an argument (rather than a debate) is nonsensical. The idea that something designed primarily for one purpose can't be used for another purpose is nonsensical. Have you never manipulated a large table or a small flat database in Excel, even though those are functions that are supposed to be in the realm of Word and Access respectively?


--- Quote ---Version 2 of SMF appears to be forum software with CMS built in...
--- End quote ---

You are mistaken. Version 2 is no different than version 1 in this regard. The same theme that makes a board look and feel like a wiki works in both versions. The same level of integration cannot possibly be achieved using other software. While some degree of integration is theoretically possible, it would be a huge amount of work and an ongoing maintenance headache—for an inferior result.


--- Quote ---From what i can see - the wiki was created to create place where new users go to get help on how to use PVD.
--- End quote ---

So what? That's why this forum was created too. So why are we trying to use two different tools at two different sites to serve the same purpose? Seems a bit nonsensical to me.


--- Quote ---I think documentation helps/how to etc needs to be separated from the forum otherwise they get lost amongst the discussion.
--- End quote ---

The reasoning here remains as circular as was when it was first used. Your argument that the needed information will be lost is based on your assumption users will not maintain the topic. This is ludicrous. If no one can be bothered updating a topic at the head of a discussion thread they're participating in, obviously they're not going to go the a different site, log into a software system they're not familiar with, and enter the content there.


--- Quote ---Here's how i think it should (and probably does) work.
--- End quote ---

Still circular. Because you think it should work this way, it should work this way. What is your objection to new users getting exactly the same content right here? If they have any question about the content, they can ask right in the applicable topic. If they want additional information, they might find valuable insights in other users' comments on the topic.


--- Quote ---The wiki or any other CMS system is never going to replace the forums because they provide different functions.
--- End quote ---

Repetition of a false premise is not helping your argument. It's only making obvious that it's build on a false premise.


--- Quote ---Rick - This is harsh. No one has trashed your idea. we have discussed its merits and potential pitfalls. This is what a forum is for.
--- End quote ---

It's not the least bit harsh. You made no attempt to address the merits (or lack thereof) of my proposal. You only argued that a wiki is designed for maintaining documentation and therefore must be a superior solution. Even after I repeatedly explained the merits (and, to be fair, even some of disadvantages and limitations) of the proposal, you refused to even acknowledge these points. The purpose of a forum is to discuss issues. To debate them, if necessary. You did not do this. You hijacked a topic, apparently because you believed the idea presented was one that would threaten the wiki. This is not particularly rational, as the wiki already faces real threats to its continued existence. This was one of the reasons for me making the proposal—we may very well need an alternative.

But, I suppose this argument—as negative as it has been—has still served a useful purpose. It's now clear any objective analysis of all the pros and cons of both alternatives can only come to one conclusion: Integrating the help documentation here is by far the most practical, efficient and useful solution. If you wish to discuss this further, I suggest we focus on those pros and cons, rather than endless arguments based on circular reasoning and unfounded opinion. Or...


--- Quote ---As i said before the two ideas / formats can coexist. For example - The forum method for creating and developing "how tos" and dynamic content and when they are stable copy and paste into the manual so "noobs" have easy access
--- End quote ---

...maybe this is what we should do. But I see no reason to arbitrarily restrict the forum help to so-called "how-tos." It would make more sense to duplicate the entire contents of the wiki, and let users decide which one is more convenient and useful.

CAD:

--- Quote ---how do you explain the relatively tiny number of logins and page edits?
--- End quote ---
People don't need to login and edit to read a manual. I would expect new users would not login as they would have no reason to.They would merely be reading content not participating.
Robots would hit the home page not sub pages. Stats indicate most hits are for the manual.


--- Quote ---The same theme that makes a board look and feel like a wiki works in both versions. The same level of integration cannot possibly be achieved using other software.
--- End quote ---
I have done it.


--- Quote ---If no one can be bothered updating a topic at the head of a discussion thread they're participating in, obviously they're not going to go the a different site
--- End quote ---
This is exactly point. They are not going to update the forum or the wiki someone needs to take ownership and do it.
This is why there is little activity on the wiki. People are lazy and want the answers given to them.


--- Quote ---What is your objection to new users getting exactly the same content right here?
--- End quote ---
The fact that they have to search and then wade through multiple threads to find the information they are looking for, or as more often the case, they post and ask the same questions that has been asked many times before. You usually point them to the relevant thread in the forum, where they have to wade through it to get the answers they require. I have had to do this when I was starting out and found it to be very frustrating. Having common answers in a manual would have been much easier.

Some examples of concerns with your idea:
[redundant material deleted]



--- Quote from: rick.ca on September 03, 2010, 04:36:24 am ---If they are "new users learning about..." then they're users, aren't they?
--- End quote ---
If they are "new users" who can't get help they will leave!


--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---From what i can see - the wiki was created to create place where new users go to get help on how to use PVD.
--- End quote ---
So what? That's why this forum was created too. So why are we trying to use two different tools at two different sites to serve the same purpose? Seems a bit nonsensical to me.
--- End quote ---
The forum is used to get clarification ask questions etc when something is unclear. The wiki is the starting point, the manual. It is like buying a tv. If you can't figure something out, The first thing you do is read the manual. You don't call the help line or start searching/posting on forums.


--- Quote ---So why are we trying to use two different tools at two different sites to serve the same purpose
--- End quote ---
They are different purposes. as already stated. "The wiki is the manual The forum is the help line."
 

--- Quote ---You only argued that a wiki is designed for maintaining documentation and therefore must be a superior solution
--- End quote ---
This is incorrect, I argued that the content of the wiki should be separated from the forum. For the reasons outlined above. I do not particularly care where it is stored. I do believe it should be formatted in a way that geared towards people who have never used PVD before and are looking for starting point.  


--- Quote ---Still circular. Because you think it should work this way, it should work this way. What is your objection to new users getting exactly the same content right here? If they have any question about the content, they can ask right in the applicable topic. If they want additional information, they might find valuable insights in other users' comments on the topic.
--- End quote ---
The wiki or any other CMS system is never going to replace the forums because they provide different functions.


--- Quote ---Repetition of a false premise is not helping your argument. It's only making obvious that it's build on a false premise.
--- End quote ---
You keep repeating this, but don't offer reasons why is it based on false premises other than it is your opinion that it is a false premise.


--- Quote ---Even after I repeatedly explained the merits (and, to be fair, even some of disadvantages and limitations) of the proposal, you refused to even acknowledge these points. The purpose of a forum is to discuss issues. To debate them, if necessary. You did not do this. You hijacked a topic,
--- End quote ---
??? - You posted your idea, presumably because you wanted comment on it, and now you are unhappy because people have commented on it and its not to your liking. You didn't address any of the concerns raised and proceeded to attack anyone who disagreed with you. You even moved the thread to a different topic - How can this be hijacking??


--- Quote ---Your argument that the needed information will be lost is based on your assumption users will not maintain the topic.
--- End quote ---
Please explain how it would work?
Would anyone be able to edit change the top level/Help topic?


--- Quote ---as the wiki already faces real threats to its continued existence. This was one of the reasons for me making the proposal—we may very well need an alternative.
--- End quote ---
This is a real concern, it would be a shame to loose such valuable content.
The data should be backed up so it can be reused in whatever medium Nostra decides to make use of.

rick.ca:
This discussion is no longer serving any purpose and will now end. If on nothing else, we seem to agree the two methods of maintaining documentation can co-exist. You're free to do what you like with the wiki. I have the right to advocate something I believe will greatly improve the effectiveness and user experience of this forum. I suggest we just leave it at that.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page