| gabriel rosenkoetter on Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:47:06 -0500 |
|
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 07:40:15AM -0800, Jeyes, David (371) wrote: > Why not? If it can be simple and primarily text for you and be neat and > appealing to me, then I really think it's a great feature. That's totally an interface issue. I don't want ANY web interface. I want to be able to download the monthly mbox files and mutt -f them. As long as I have that, I'm happy. Do whatever webfoo you like, but do it backed by (or having processed the) mboxes. If you've got a way to get from mbox to a populated, searchable interface, fine. What I'm uncomfortable with, btw, would be posts *from* this interface. That screams "spam us, please", and is also a non-trivial technical problem. > Can't they have some level of synchronization (like sync the general forum > with the mailing list)? Not really, not the way this is being laid out. From earlier in your message: > The best thing, from my perspective is the ability to create forums to > discuss things that aren't exactly linux, like wifi or OS X, without > separating them from the PLUG community. Or starting massive flame wars > about what is OT. I maintain that anything computers and Unixy is NOT off-topic here. It would be silly, petty, and nearly impossible to exclude it. But if you create a "for NetBSD" section on the website WITHOUT somehow bridging it to the existing mailing list and people start using that to ask obscure NetBSD questions like those that have come in the past year or two to which I've been the only PLUG member with an answer, they will go completely unanswered, which degrades the utility of the mailing list rather than building it up. This is just one example, and one that involves me personally. There are plenty others on topics other than Linux that I don't think should be hidden away in a web-only bulletin board. (And no, I'm not interested in subscribing to a bunch of separate mailing lists for PLUG. I already do that for NetBSD, cryptography discussion, and securityfocus.com. Please don't add to everyone's mail clutter needlessly.) > Web interfaces just might be a good way to be newbie > friendly and I don't feel that a decent UI is bad. (Neither do most users, > else we'd have DOS 2k running on corporate desktops). A web interface could > just be helpful in building the community (ahem /.) and another way of > acting as linux advocates to the community. All well and good. I have no interest in it personally, but go forth. Let's please not splinter things too much though; at least coordinate with whoever's maintaining the PLUG website on mct's system (though it doesn't NEED to be hosted there; we would be foolish to pay for hosting, of course... mct has a T1, I've got 768 SDSL, and various other people have either home or through-work connections that make paying for colo for this sort of silly). > > > I though the weblinks, downloads, and FAQ section would be > > > useful to some - maybe not. > This is a huge reason that I think that this would be great. If people were > more involved in the site, they'd be more apt to contribute to these > sections, thus making the sections more useful. . . and so on. With this I agree whole-heartedly. It's a perfect use fo the interface presented. And if the look-and-feel of that interface can be configured by the user, then even I'm liable to use it. -- gabriel rosenkoetter gr@eclipsed.net Attachment:
pgpX6EHwe9nDk.pgp
|
|