| |
In lugnet.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.general, Tim Courtney writes:
> > This is a big point which I feel needs attention. I know many people who
> > either find LUGNET too confusing to set up for posting, or don't like it for
> > one reason or another.
[...]
> I agree. Let's all keep this in mind over the next few weeks as the
> setup/sign-up stuff on LUGNET is overhauled and keep our collective eyes out
> for points of confusion.
Cool.
> > There are many other LEGO communities which exist (quite contently) outside
> > of LUGNET. If there's any push to further establish LUGNET as the de facto
> > center, I feel it will alienate other communities further and cause more
> > fragmentation in the hobby.
>
> I'm not sure what you're trying to say. The core purpose of LUGNET is to
> unite. Despite this, there *is* fragmentation in the hobby, and there
> always will be to some degree. LUGNET's push for the next few months is
> actually anti-alienation/anti-fragmentation.
A good goal for LUGNET to have.
What I'm trying to get to is this; I believe, based on what I've heard
coming out of discussions with many different types of LEGO fans, there are
(sometimes quite valid) perceptions about the social environment on LUGNET
which push people away. This is no fault of the administrators, in my view,
but a result of the prevailing attitude of LUGNET's posters. I've
contributed to that climate, along with many other LEGO fans who think a
certain way.
For example, Bionicle. I was a big participant in the BrickShelf avatar
debate thread a year or more back, which alienated a lot of Bionicle fans
from LUGNET [1]. Bionicle Zone and Kanohi Power sprung up around that time
(I believe a bit before, actually), and have since merged into BZPower.
Bionicle caters to a different demographic - one that not everyone welcomes
on LUGNET - kids around 10-14. We, collectively, myself being an active
participant, rejected their form of enjoying the LEGO hobby, and pushed them
away. BZPower I believe has over 5000 forum participants (I've learned in
recent conversations with Rich, one of their admins). That's quite a
significant LEGO community, which is not a part of LUGNET.
To a lesser extent, FBTB caters to a different demographic as well. Visitors
there are hardcore SW fans of all ages, and quite a few kids in the same age
range I mentioned above. I know the culture is very different at FBTB by
participating in both places.
Do I think this form of fragmentation is bad? Not really. One thing I
started off the thread with (and I'm so pleased it's spun off in a bazillion
different directions too, shows people are really engaging the ideas and
forming their own!) was acknowledging that we are all different, and enjoy
different aspects of the LEGO hobby for different reasons. Different sites
and their different social climates arise to suit everyone's needs.
Now, if LUGNET can bring these diverging groups together in the future,
great! If not, I don't sweat it all that much. I'd prefer not to interfere
with diverging social groups - as a push to consolidate them into LUGNET
might be ill-received. I'd rather focus on defragmenting resources, as
opposed to people.
That said, where I don't think fragmentation is good is in data. Right now
we have several set databases, several parts databases, different color
definitions, different inventory sites, and more. Some of these sites are
compatible with one another, they cross-reference their data. Others do not.
Were it a perfect world, I'd like to see an agreed upon standard for
community data exchange, and open sharing of data from one site to another.
I can understand people putting their hearts and souls into a project and
wanting to maintain their own branding on the data they've collected. They
don't own the data about LEGO sets, though - no one does. I think where
LUGNET can help is taking a leadership role in data exchange standards, and
opening up their data for use on other sites (while encouraging other
resources to do the same).
This touches on a project I was working on about a year ago, leading up to
BrickFest, which I know you (Todd) know of. I look forward to sharing it
more with you when you visit, and I also would like to publish the materials
for everyone to see. I don't quite have the time to do the work to get these
materials ready for public consumption yet.
I know this is the tip of the iceberg of a potentially enormous topic - and
I apologize to everyone for being so vague. It's simply that I don't have
the energy or time right at this moment to put all of my thoughts down, as
well as release any materials I've created as a part of studying such a
system for data exchange and it's potential. Brainstorm away though, please,
if you wish. :-)
> This is one of the reasons the
> World LUG Map is being redesigned in such a broad way (train clubs and
> robotics groups have more similarities than differences) and why there are a
> whole bunch of announcement groups now for other sites, with the idea of
> increasing exposure. As member resources are revamped and reorganized, it's
> a great time to put a lot of effort into making things as clear and simple
> as possible for the less techincally inclined.
Cool!
> > I'd like to see a common ground where various LEGO communities can come
> > together and discuss pan-hobby with each other. I don't think any resource
> > exists at the moment to provide that where everyone (who converses online)
> > is comfortable. Were LUGNET more user-friendly both from a technical
> > perspective and a social perspective, it could have become just that.
>
> Ok, instead of speculating on what could have been, let's look at where we
> are and figure out how to get where we want to be.
Definitely.
> > I do
> > believe based on conversations with many non-LUGNET LEGO fans, it's no
> > longer possible for LUGNET to be perceived as a neutral meeting ground.
>
> What do you think needs to change to fix this? Let's list out the perceived
> problems.
I'm admittedly not the best person to list issues, cause they're not all
mine. I'd much prefer if people who have negative perceptions of LUGNET and
the LUGNET community would speak out here and let their feelings be known so
the problems get solved. I'll give it a whack, though.
- I know several perceive an unwritten code of conduct here which prevents
and strongly discourages certain forms of expression. [2]
- While not concrete, I do feel some members of the LUGNET community,
consciously or unconsciously, act as if LUGNET is superior to other LEGO
websites, and that it's the center of the LEGO universe. LUGNET may be very
central to the online LEGO hobby - I don't think that's the problem. I think
it's the _attitude_ that it is which offends 'outsiders.'
- Tacked onto that, there's an 'outsider' impression of a 'ruling elite' in
the LEGO hobby; the administrators of the big sites, the most frequent
posters here, etc. Not everyone has a good image of that group (I would
imagine I could gain a negative image from being associated with that group
as well). I think setting up an open standardized data exchange would help
improve this perception.
- I've heard numerous reports of emails to admins for help going unanswered.
Over time, this has turned some people off to LUGNET. If there is too much
help email coming in, or if it's too fatiguing to answer all of it (belive
me, I know the feeling), I suggest better documentation or clearer
interfaces to address the problems. It looks like you're already of a
mindset to fix this :-)
- Others have decried the community as a competitive, closed-source
environment designed to keep people out. I haven't spoken a lot with Amy
privately, but I think this post illustrates some of the sentiment:
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=41899
I've heard more blunt versions of what she said there, too. I think in
certain areas, I've contributed to that keeping people out bit in community
projects of mine - one of the reasons I'm trying to bring this discussion up
in public, to end that.
> > That's not to say I don't love LUGNET for what it is, I just acknowledge
> > what it isn't! :-)
>
> That's an interesting thought. What _isn't_ LUGNET to you? (anyone)
I think I've said enough for one post. I'll let others chime in here before
I say my feelings.
This has been a great thread in all, and a great spinoff discussing the
LUGNET community too! Thanks Todd, for engaging the topic - I'm very
encouraged to see you addressing the issues, perceived or real, facing
LUGNET. :o)
I think the more open, honest discussion we have about the issues in the
LEGO community and the LUGNET community, the better this place will get.
That said, I'm definitely committed to moving forward, rather than dwelling
in the past, what was, and what wasn't. As you said, let's assess where we
are, where we want to be, and move in that direction. :-)
-Tim
[1] Something which I'm not too proud of now. Since that debate, my horizons
have definitely broadened with regard to the LEGO hobby, and I've become a
lot more inclusive in my approach to things. All this from someone whom JAL
called both a Communist and Hitler in the same post. ;^)
[2] By nature, that isn't bad, but people can and have been rubbed the wrong
way by it.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
200 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
