| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> writes:
> Todd told me offline he's thinking of empowering someone to do some
> content organization in the /reviews/ part of LUGNET.
Not thinking of it; already offered it.
> Bad idea.
Why do you say it's a bad idea?
Every section of the LUGNET website (not just /reviews/) can use a curator
or a set of co-curators for content and links organization. (Currently, I'm
curating all of the areas myself, but that's no good. Obviously much more
would get done if N zillion people all could co-curate. I've still a bit
more code to write before that's a reality.)
Joseph sounded so enthusiastic about getting something going -- yet so
bummed out about past experiences -- that asking him if he wanted to be the
curator of /reviews/ seemed like a perfectly logical thing to do. (I can
set up a single curator for now without much trouble, but not a bunch
simultaneously yet.)
Joseph can always say no, or he take on the responsibility for a short time
and have other people join in later, or whatever. I always thought that
Joshua would want to be the focal-person for the /reviews/ section (and
maybe he does) but he's been so busy.
I haven't written any new code in several days, so this is perfect timing:
I'm useful, it's fun, it's exciting (because it makes direct progress), and
it's right up the alley of related important issues (90% code overlap with
arbitrary member pages).
> This is somewhere where the bazaar method is presenting us a ready made
> answer, although it isn't TODD's code. Let's go with the FAQoMatic
> approach here (and maybe extend it to the overall FAQ too??) as long as
> someone with smarts has perused the actual content with an eye to
> inhalability if it doesn't pan out.
I agree.
FAQoMatic sounds like it fits Joseph's bill of requirements wonderfully (not
as well as news threading, but plenty good enough). It even lets you give
links to external pages, meaning that existing reviews in news articles and
follow-up discussions/commentary are easy to link to, for example:
http://www.lugnet.com/reviews/?n=12
http://www.lugnet.com/reviews/?n=54
http://www.lugnet.com/reviews/?n=105
http://www.lugnet.com/reviews/?n=143
The LUGNET bazaar approach is still vaporware (it's still an ugly cathedral
approach) so it can't be quite as immediately useful.
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New review site going up...
|
| Ya! I like this. Todd told me offline he's thinking of empowering someone to do some content organization in the /reviews/ part of LUGNET. Bad idea. This is somewhere where the bazaar method is presenting us a ready made answer, although it isn't (...) (25 years ago, 18-Aug-99, to lugnet.reviews, lugnet.admin.general)
|
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
