Make a message a sticky?

[ka3jjz]

I think that function is reserved for the moderators; I have a few links that would be very useful as stickies since they answer questions that seem to be very common - i.e. where do I get information on x receiver, where can I get frequencies, and so on. To whom should I send them?

Thanx es 73s Mike

 

[loumaag]

I think that function is reserved for the moderators; I have a few links that would be very useful as stickies since they answer questions that seem to be very common - i.e. where do I get information on x receiver, where can I get frequencies, and so on. To whom should I send them?

Mike, stickies are reserved for discussions of ongoing topics of wide interests or for announcments (which are usually closed so only the original post is there.) Once a sticky's usefullness is over, the thread is "un-stuck" and it falls away by date of last post.

What you are describing is more like FAQ information and that belongs in the RR Wiki, which you are welcome to post in providing you follow the style of existing content.

 

[ka3jjz]

Hi Lou - I'd use the Wiki, but I feel that the application as presented has several serious flaws that render it almost useless, to me anyway...

a. Lack of Visibility - This is probably more of a judgement call. but before Lindsay's invitation, a single lone link at the top of a toolbar does not render an application 'visible'. In addition, anyone who has looked at the Wiki as it currently stands would think that all the 'static content' has already been installed; there doesn't seem to be any room to add anything more. If 'static content' meant things that won't change (like RR frequencies and Marine band channels), then people will think that's all that would be accepted. If that's not what was intended, then perhaps the phrase should be restated.
In addition, there's no apparent mechanism to announce changes to the Wiki, so there's no way for people to see when changes being applied, unlike the RRDB. In my case, if I applied changes to the HF Ute page, I'd be willing to bet very few folks would even know that I did. I could announce it, but in a few weeks, it will almost certainly be forgotten.
One solution might be a dedicated Wiki forum, where folks can have their changes 'announced' and kept for a short period of time - say 30 days. This forum can also be used for another purpose, which I'll get to in a moment. A short box announcing Wiki changes, like what is done for the RRDB, would serve as a hook to bring in visitors

b. Programming - Let's face it, not everyone wants to program. The Wiki language seems distantly related to HTML, with a little C and VB thrown in for good measure. Newcomers might find this a bit daunting, in spite of the reference page that's already there, and there might well be some oldtimers who just don't want the hassle.

c. Lack of Control - Probably the single worst point is likely to also be Wiki's strength. Anyone that has an account can change most any page - and here's what gets an old Production analyst like me - even have 2 people change the same page. Unless I missed it - very possible - it seems quite plausible for 2 folks to move the same page into their sandbox, make changes to it, and each have the other's changes wiped because they applied 2 seperate sets of changes without looking to see if the original had changed. It doesn't appear that there's a 'lock' applied on the original
once someone has copied it, with the 'lock' being released when the changed page is uploaded.
This is where the Wiki forum would come in handy. Someone who wanted to change, say the HF page, could grab it, then post a message saying they've got it - there's the chance that someone else might coordinate some changes without having the risk of overlaying one version with another.

Adding those 2 things would, I think, go at least part of the way to bring in new users; otherwise, I fear that in its current form, it will remain largely unused and unrecognized.

73s Mike

 

[loumaag]

Mike,

You make some valid points.

As to the visibility, well of course the more it is used the more it becomes visible. The majority of the static information that was here on the RR Main Site (used to get to most of it from the home page) was moved to the Wiki early on and I guess the concept of "static" stuck. Static in this instance is more like data that is not going to change in a major way over time. Specifically FAQ information, nationially used frequency lists, scanner model specifications, (and yes) links to important topics located elsewhere, etc. can all be considered pretty static in nature.

As to the construction of suitable documents for the Wiki. (You referred to programming.) As you point out, there are instructions and of course as a valid user you can look at any document already there to see how it was constructed. The whole point of HTML (and all of its derivatives) is to provide a rich palette of functions with which you can word smith interesting documents. Even these forums allow some of that, but very restricted, but in either case, plain text does work and if it needs dressing up, someone will come along that didn't know the subject matter but knows how to make it look great!

And that of course leads to your point about the changes and edit. Well of course that is the point of a Wiki, but, it is watched over and every change is recorded and indeed can be reversed. You yourself can just look the history of documents and see what was changed and who changed it and when. So although your senerio of 2 people changing something at the same time is possible, in fact the editing is actually done on the Wiki, so everytime you edit something, you should first review it to see what it looks like and then commit it, during that process, the fact that someone else is editing should be apparent.