| |
| Writings Discussion Authors Help Search Home |
School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Matthew Patterson, the Paranoid Minister on 5/2/2000; 9:05 PM Or, "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Conversant Discussion Boards." Anyway, this is in response to various discussions in the Religious Musings of the Nitpicker Central Bulletin Brash Reflections, including a suggestion that they be moved over to this site. So... 1) Shakespeare should be watched in a performance, not studied exhaustively only through a close reading of the script. 2) Traiditionally, a comprehensive test over every aspect of a work of literature means that the unit on that piece of literature is done. 3) Forcing someone to exhaustively study a piece of literatureis one of the fastest ways to turn them off to it. Discuss.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Matthew Patterson, the Paranoid Minister on 5/2/2000; 7:27 PM Okay, this little piece of *CENSORED* doesn't like my plain ol' HTML. Hence the repost. 1) Shakespeare is best studied by watching the play performed, not through an exhaustive study of the text. 2) A comprehensive test covering all aspects of a particular work of literature means that the unit over that is DONE. 3) The quickest way to turn someone off of a work of literature is to force them to study it. Discuss.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Seth Dillingham on 5/2/2000; 7:51 PM On Tuesday, May 2, 2000 at 11:33 PM, Matthew (Matthew) wrote: >Okay, this little piece of *CENSORED* doesn't like my plain ol' >HTML. Hence the repost. *ahem* How did you post this "plain ol' HTML"? Did you send an email, or post it through the web discussion board? If you posted it through the web discussion board, then the only reason it would reject the HTML tags is if Mark hasn't told Conversant to allow them. What tag did you use, that it didn't like? Also, why post a second message, instead of just editing the first? If we understood what you didn't like, we would find it easier to fix it. Seth Seth Dillingham seth@macrobyte.net President, Macrobyte Resources (860) 572-0244 ======================================================================== 76 Dogwood Lane http://www.MacrobyteResources.com/ Mystic, CT 06355
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Matthew Patterson, the Paranoid Minister on 5/2/2000; 8:19 PM Sorry. I like technology as much as the next guy, but when things go wrong, I get mean. Also, I'm generally not fond of web discussion boards. Anyway, the HTML in question was only one simple link to an off-site page, posted from the Mac version of Netscape Communicator 4.7, and the reason I posted a second message is that Netscape refused to load anything on the message page below the title of the message. So I didn't get the "Edit" option. I reloaded a couple times but it never showed up. Switched to IE and posted the second. Also, I'm not very familiar with the system that this board uses, and forgot that I could edit messages I post. (Sorry, but I'm an old-fashioned Web user.) Quite frankly it still creeps me out that I can edit messages after-the-fact. After all, if I can do it, someone else can, and I'm none too fond of that idea. (Hate, hate, hate revisionist history.)
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Seth Dillingham on 5/2/2000; 8:50 PM On Wednesday, May 3, 2000 at 12:25 AM, Matthew (Matthew) wrote: >Also, I'm generally not fond of web discussion boards. Then don't think of it as a web discussion board: think of it as a mailing list, and use it that way. You can subscribe to the site by email in the /members/ area (if you'd like the exact URL, just ask). Then, any message posted on the site is sent to you in email, and you can respond by email and your message will be posted in the correct place. Maybe you don't like mailing lists either? Then think of it as a newsgroup. There are instructions in the support site (http://www.free-conversant.com/support/docs/) for connecting to the site with a news client (like Netscape Communicator 4.7). >Anyway, the HTML in question was only one simple link to an off-site >page, posted from the Mac version of Netscape Communicator 4.7, and >the reason I posted a second message is that Netscape refused to >load anything on the message page below the title of the message. So >I didn't get the "Edit" option. I reloaded a couple times but it >never showed up. Switched to IE and posted the second. My guess is that there was a problem with the tag. Conversant didn't do anything to it... it's just that the browser couldn't display it. You probably tried to enclose the HREF attribute in quotes, but left one out, or used a double quote on one side and a single quote on the other. Again, this isn't Conversant's problem, it's simply a result of the browser trying to deal with a badly-formed tag. You can DEFINITELY post HTML tags in your messages. For that matter, you're already using a great HTML-messaging client (Netscape 4.7). You can post your messages through email as HTML, and they'll show up correctly on the site... and then the HTML will be stripped out before it's resent to the "mailing list", so that people won't get HTML in their mail (which annoys many people). >Also, I'm not very familiar with the system that this board uses, >and forgot that I could edit messages I post. (Sorry, but I'm an >old-fashioned Web user.) Quite frankly it still creeps me out that I >can edit messages after-the-fact. After all, if I can do it, someone >else can, and I'm none too fond of that idea. (Hate, hate, hate >revisionist history.) I understand your concerns, and many of us share them. We're already working on a small upgrade that will allow a site admin (like Mark) to specify whether or not mesages can be edited by non-admins or not. Please understand, this software is not just a "web discussion board"... it's a content management system. It's a tool designed to make it easy to create and manage the content of a site. Any message left here can be published to a non-discussion web page... which is why it's very important that messages be editable (would you want a web page on your site that you can't edit?) I hope this clears a few things up. If you've got any further questions, or want to see how something works, come visit us on the support site (the URL is at the top), and ask your question. We answer questions very quickly, and are trying very hard to help people create great websites with our software. (If you're ever inclined to do so, feel free to sign up for your own free site, at http://www.free-conversant.com/signup/). Sincerely, Seth Dillingham seth@macrobyte.net President, Macrobyte Resources (860) 572-0244 ======================================================================== 76 Dogwood Lane http://www.MacrobyteResources.com/ Mystic, CT 06355
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/2/2000; 9:16 PM Before we get back to the actual darn topic--Matt, you forgot the closing quote on your HREF tag. I have repaired it. One of the perks of being the site administrator, and all that. I got the "edit" link, even without the closing tag. Weird. Maybe because Conversant loves Mark so much? Who's to say. As for the admin-only editing--I'm going to think about it. Generally when it comes to limits like that I like to assume that everybody is nice, and I won't have to. If something has been edited (like this post), it brazenly screams "edit" in the discussion calendar view. It would only take a couple of times like that for everyone to learn who can be trusted to be honest and who can't, don't you think? If we got someone here who had a habit of editing their posts to make everyone look silly we could apply peer pressure, or I could just tell them to cut it out or else. I would rather it be handled as a conversation instead of a control element, since Conversant provide basic revision tracking (by telling you if something has been revised). Others, such as Brian Carnell, I can see why he might want some more control over the situation. This feels a bit like a "let's take it one day at a time" situation.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/2/2000; 9:38 PM There is so much in Shakespeare that it can be fun to try and find all the hidden meanings of things, or what the heck a "petard" is (early French land mine). And there have been times when I've had to read a summary of a scene to understand what the heck was going on. When Polonious sends and an agent to check up on his son in Hamlet, there is a scene where he's giving (mostly bogus) advice on how to spy on the boy. But when I saw the Derek Jacobi/Kenneth Branagh movie version, between the Shakespearisms and the British accents I couldn't figure out what the hell was going on in that scene. However...Shakespeare is meant to be seen on the stage! It is an experience. I had to read Richard III in class once, and it just about put me totally to sleep. Then I saw it on the stage, with an aquaitance playing Richard. When he sent his agent to kill two children in a tower, I almost leapt on the stage and strangled him! After the production I told him, "Maybe it's not a good idea after all to have you over for dinner. . . ." Shakespeare is very, very much meant to be seen and not just dissected at the desk.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/2/2000; 10:45 PM Addendum: the Conversant support site is right here. The URL "at the top" that Seth refers to is only visible to he and I, as administrators. Why is he an administrator? Owns the company, that's why. . . .
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Seth Dillingham on 5/2/2000; 10:59 PM On Wednesday, May 3, 2000 at 2:52 AM, Mark Morgan (mark_morgan@yahoo.com) wrote: >Addendum: the Conversant support site is right here. The URL "at >the top" that Seth refers to is only visible to he and I, as >administrators. Why is he an administrator? Owns the company, >that's why. . . . Actually, I was talking about the URL to the support site that I put at the top of that message. :-) (It was to the /docs/ subdirectory of the support site, but it would have worked anyway.) Seth Seth Dillingham seth@macrobyte.net President, Macrobyte Resources (860) 572-0244 ======================================================================== 76 Dogwood Lane http://www.MacrobyteResources.com/ Mystic, CT 06355
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Matthew Patterson, the Paranoid Minister on 5/2/2000; 11:07 PM >>Also, I'm generally not fond of web discussion boards. >Then don't think of it as a web discussion board: think of it as a mailing list, and use it that way. Then (and, sorry in advance), if it's a mailing list, it needs to stay out of my Web browser. Sorry, but all this "content management technology" stuff really freaks me out. I'm used to these things being available in one way, and only one: either as a newsgroup, or a mailing list, or a Web forum, not all at once. (Which is part of why I also don't like Dejanews, although I have other reasons for that.) >You can subscribe to the site by email in the /members/ area (if you'd like the exact URL, just ask). Then, any message posted on the >site is sent to you in email, and you can respond by email and your message will be posted in the correct place. I dunno... I've had bad experiences with this in the past... mostly because my email address kept getting overwhelmed, and I usually found it easier to unsubscribe myself and just check the site every day. >Maybe you don't like mailing lists either? Then think of it as a newsgroup. There are instructions in the support site >(http://www.free-conversant.com/support/docs/) for connecting to the site with a news client (like Netscape Communicator 4.7). On the other hand, I like newsgroups... I'll have to look into this. I still like the metaphor of the Web forum better, though. >>Anyway, the HTML in question was only one simple link to an off-site >>page, posted from the Mac version of Netscape Communicator 4.7, and >>the reason I posted a second message is that Netscape refused to >>load anything on the message page below the title of the message. So >>I didn't get the "Edit" option. I reloaded a couple times but it >>never showed up. Switched to IE and posted the second. >My guess is that there was a problem with the tag. Conversant didn't do anything to it... it's just that the browser couldn't display it. >You probably tried to enclose the HREF attribute in quotes, but left one out, or used a double quote on one side and a single quote on >the other. Again, this isn't Conversant's problem, it's simply a result of the browser trying to deal with a badly-formed tag. Which, as it turns out, is exacly what it was. I apologize for blaming it on the system. It's just that I get home every day after everyone expects me to solve their quirky PC problems, I'm sick of computer errors, no matter how they're caused, by 3. >You can DEFINITELY post HTML tags in your messages. Oh good... >For that matter, you're already using a great HTML-messaging client (Netscape 4.7). You can post your messages through email as >HTML, and they'll show up correctly on the site... and then the HTML will be stripped out before it's resent to the "mailing list", so that >people won't get HTML in their mail (which annoys many people). I woudn't exactly call Netscape a "great" messaging client... Outlook Express has it beat in most respects... I just use it because Outlook (no joke) started crashing every time I would try to read a usenet post by a particular sender. (Seriously.) I find Netscape to be much more stable than Outlook and IE. >>Also, I'm not very familiar with the system that this board uses, >>and forgot that I could edit messages I post. (Sorry, but I'm an >>old-fashioned Web user.) Quite frankly it still creeps me out that I >>can edit messages after-the-fact. After all, if I can do it, someone >>else can, and I'm none too fond of that idea. (Hate, hate, hate >>revisionist history.) >I understand your concerns, and many of us share them. We're already working on a small upgrade that will allow a site admin (like >Mark) to specify whether or not mesages can be edited by non-admins or not. >Please understand, this software is not just a "web discussion board"... it's a content management system. It's a tool designed to >make it easy to create and manage the content of a site. Any message left here can be published to a non-discussion web page... >which is why it's very important that messages be editable (would you want a web page on your site that you can't edit?) I understand your point well enough. It seems to me, though, that if people are going to be using this as a web discussion board, the system is going to have to be able to imitate a typical Web board a bit better. As it stands now, people (well, me), are getting confused because it's similar enough that they expect it to work like they're used to, yet dissimilar enough to lead to problems. Also, strikes me that I could take anything posted on a non-editable message and put it on a non-discussion webpage. Select all, copy, open a new PageMill document, paste, format, save, upload. Not terribly difficult, although I can see how the Conversant system makes it at once simpler and more complex. Sorry if I'm coming across as rude or overbearing here, but I'm still unsure of what I'm doing here, and as is my typical pattern of behavior, I's gonna keep askin' till I gets sure. (Out, damn Texas, out I say!)
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/2/2000; 11:12 PM Duh. Bedtime? Why, no. Should it be? Why, yes.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/3/2000; 12:30 AM Matt-- This isn't just a discussion board. It's the heart of the entire system. All the content is generated through postings like this, either on the web or in the newsgroup or via e-mail. Then you just find different ways to display it. Let me tell you one thing I can do here that I couldn't do in Pagemill: change the look of every single page just by editing the template, and have the changes appear instantly. I could change the logo this second, and it would be changed this second everywhere on the site. Instantly. And I mean, I could move it, change the its size parameters, and it would apply everywhere. The one time I tried that with the old version of the site, a mere 40 pages long, it took two hours to recode everything. Every. Single. Page. One. At. A. Time. Lord knows how long it would take now if I tried it the old way--we have much more than 40 pages. And I could never get third party discussion board tools to really look like the rest of the site. By regular web discussion board, what do you mean? We've already discussed a Ultimate Bulletin Board variant; Discus is just like UBB, in frames. Discus also makes it almost impossible to link to a particular message. I would love to link to some of my posts on Nitpicker Central, but it's a royal pain in the butt. You basically have to dig into the source view to find the anchors. But I bet you're referring to that thing where you can see the whole thread (or the whole chapter) on one page. That's in the works, I am sure. But there are message boards out there that are threaded like this one, too. And holy wars about which kind is better, threaded or flat. . . . Do you have a different brand of discussion board you're referring to? Or kind? It's all in the presentation; since Conversant separates presentation from content they can in principle make the web discussion board look like any other kind you could possibly think of. Really. It's amazing. I know you well enough not to take your comments as an attack; others around here either trust my judgement or ignore it, depending on whether they are gullible or sensible. Make your own classifications! Seth and the guys at Macrobytes understand Conversant the best; I might brag to be second on that list, were I the bragging type. Keep asking questions, we've got answers. Okay, now I really feel like Guy Kawasaki.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/3/2000; 1:38 AM Addendum: I just read your comment about how Conversant makes things both simpler and more complex. Let me tell you, I have yet to see the "more complex" part. You know how long it took me to generate the site map? Ten seconds. The formatting is taking longer, but that's all "in my head" time. When I decide on the format for the map I want, it might take me fifteen minutes to set it up, give or take coding errors (I'm always forgetting the stupid closing quote on the HREF tag). Then you know what I will have to do to add a new page to the map? What convoluted steps I will have to take? What setting I will have to adjust? What coding I will have to do? Nada. It sounds trivial, but this kind of elegant automation is a byproduct of the way Conversant handles content. Conversant already knows everything it needs to know to generate a map; "all" the programmers had to do was connect to the existing information, and whip up a the administration forms for us to use. "All" they will have to do to create new features is build on the massive foundation they've programmed into the thing. Content management systems are a beautiful thing. Who wants to spend every freaking hour figuring out the coding for things? You know how frustrating it is to try and dig out the problems with computers. Conversant lets you avoid ninety-nine percent of the nonsense, and focus on the darn content. I don't miss the gymnastics I used to have to go through to take care of this site. The darn site nearly maintains itself! I used to have to take submissions by e-mail, cutting and pasting and glueing and editing and worrying about whether to take HTML attachments and generally killing myself. Doing the Dispatches (which are now Dreamzone) was a royal pain in the butt with all the archiving and index page writing and navigation editing. Now it's all autmomated, thank the gods. I really can't think of any way that Conversant has made it more complex to do something. Not for me. You wrote: "Also, strikes me that I could take anything posted on a non-editable message and put it on a non-discussion webpage. Select all, copy, open a new PageMill document, paste, format, save, upload. Not terribly difficult. . . ."It used to take me ten minutes to link a story to a discussion thread! And that's not including the upload time, or the time wasted if I found a mistake after it was uploaded. Do you know how long it takes me now? Zero minutes. It just works. More things in life should just work.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/3/2000; 1:43 AM Addendum, part the second: I just now added a link to the site map to every single page on this site. I timed it: two minutes, 43 seconds.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Matthew Patterson, the Paranoid Minister on 5/3/2000; 11:00 PM Matt-- >This isn't just a discussion board. It's the heart of the entire system. All the content is generated through postings like this, either on the >web or in the newsgroup or via e-mail. Then you just find different ways to display it. And that's all very nice. The trouble is when my nice little Web-adapted mind comes along and tries to interact with this system in the manner in which I am most familiar, and then wind up with something totally bizarre. >Let me tell you one thing I can do here that I couldn't do in Pagemill: change the look of every single page just by editing the template, >and have the changes appear instantly. I could change the logo this second, and it would be changed this second everywhere on the >site. Instantly. And I mean, I could move it, change the its size parameters, and it would apply everywhere. > >The one time I tried that with the old version of the site, a mere 40 pages long, it took two hours to recode everything. Every. Single. >Page. One. At. A. Time. Lord knows how long it would take now if I tried it the old way--we have much more than 40 pages. And I could >never get third party discussion board tools to really look like the rest of the site. I'm glad that it's so easy for you to change the content of this site. However, try to look at this from the perspective of one of your loyal minions. We know that you're just a guy in Oregon on a rev. A iMac doing this. What you've managed to do with this is great so far. Anything that makes it easier for you is a good thing. However, most of us are adapted to thinking about things in a different way, and it's difficult for me to adapt to this particular system's way of thinking. >By regular web discussion board, what do you mean? We've already discussed a Ultimate Bulletin Board variant; Discus is just like >UBB, in frames. Discus also makes it almost impossible to link to a particular message. I would love to link to some of my posts on >Nitpicker Central, but it's a royal pain in the butt. You basically have to dig into the source view to find the anchors. But I bet you're >referring to that thing where you can see the whole thread (or the whole chapter) on one page. That's in the works, I am sure. But there >are message boards out there that are threaded like this one, too. And holy wars about which kind is better, threaded or flat. . . . Both of my favorite discussion boards (Nitpicker Central Bulletin Brash Reflections and TheDrumClub.com) use Discus. Thus far, it's the best bulletin board I've used. I particularly like its little preview feature, which allows me to see, for example, if my HTML's going to work before I post a message. That helps immensely. (Note to whoever's listening: a preview feature would be much appreciated!) I also like Discus because it doesn't rely on a bunch of weird graphics and colors to get the job done. I like things to be as fast as possible, and Discus is as fast a board as I've seen. This board, or at least the version of this content that I'm currently choosing to view as a discussion board, is pretty good too, although the black is still a bit jarring. >Do you have a different brand of discussion board you're referring to? Or kind? It's all in the presentation; since Conversant separates >presentation from content they can in principle make the web discussion board look like any other kind you could possibly think of. >Really. It's amazing. That's... great. Really great. Please tell me I'm not the only one out there who liked the Web just fine the way it was? This Conversant stuff really blurs the lines for me, and I don't see that as a good thing. >I know you well enough not to take your comments as an attack; others around here either trust my judgement or ignore it, depending >on whether they are gullible or sensible. Make your own classifications! > >Seth and the guys at Macrobytes understand Conversant the best; I might brag to be second on that list, were I the bragging type. Keep >asking questions, we've got answers. > >Okay, now I really feel like Guy Kawasaki. Hey, he's a great guy. You could do worse.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Matthew Patterson, the Paranoid Minister on 5/3/2000; 11:09 PM >Addendum: I just read your comment about how Conversant makes things both simpler and more complex. Let me tell you, I have yet to >see the "more complex" part. You know how long it took me to generate the site map? Ten seconds. The formatting is taking longer, but >that's all "in my head" time. When I decide on the format for the map I want, it might take me fifteen minutes to set it up, give or take >coding errors (I'm always forgetting the stupid closing quote on the HREF tag). > >Then you know what I will have to do to add a new page to the map? What convoluted steps I will have to take? What setting I will have >to adjust? What coding I will have to do? > >Nada. Okay. Again, this is great for you, Simpler for you. More complex for me trying to figure out just how the heck this thing is working. I haven't got that much time to spare lately. (And right now I'm in too bad a mood to think about it. We just went to a state band contest, and received a II and two III rankings (on a scale of I, best, to IV, God-awful) from three different judges on our concert performance. I realize that I'm biased, of course, but we weren't that bad. I mean, really. I'd be very interested to listen to the judges' tapes and hear their reasoning process here.)
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/3/2000; 11:23 PM Discus is fine if all you want is a discussion board. But you know that half the people on Bulletin Brash Reflections don't even know the rest of the site exists. There is just way, way too much disconnect between the board and the rest of the web site. The discussion board is its own little world--the rest of the site might as well not even exist! Some people there have never heard of Phil Farrand, or his books. Does that sound like a good choice for my website? Really, for anyone's? I think your problems are still just ones of presentation. The weird colors are my choice, and have nothing to do with Conversant. And I still think the things you like most about Discus could be solved very easily just by creating a non-threaded, all-on-one page variant of the Conversant display. I don't mind Discus if a board is all you want, but you can't really use Discus to link to, say, a particular story. If I want feedback for the Morgan Dilemna, Discus just won't let me do that. Not and put a link back on the web page for the Dilemna It's not in there! Sorry you don't like the black, but I simply haven't had the time to experiment with it any more. I'm concerned I might just make it unreadable or some god-awful thing. And, quite frankly, it's growing on me. There is nothing wrong with looking at this as a website with a discussion board. Bearing that in mind, what exactly (other than a post preview) do you want in a discussion board that you don't have here? Please be specific as possible. Addendum: is Discus the only board tool you're familiar with? A lot of the things that bother you are present in other thread-based discussion tools, other than Conversant. Really. Most of them have toolbars like the ones on Conversant, and manage the messages the same way (look at one at a time). Bearing that in mind, what kind of presentation do you prefer? I see the main difference is that Discus has a topics list, then subtopics, and then subtopics beyond that. That is a different kind of discussion board, but again one that Conversant can, and almost certainly will, adopt in the future. A much more popular non-threaded discussion board tool is the Ultimate Bulletin Board. There is an example at the Web Pages That Suck discussion board. See what I mean about the topics and the subtopics there? Is that the sort of thing that you would like in a bulletin board system?
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Seth Dillingham on 5/4/2000; 12:04 AM On Thursday, May 4, 2000 at 3:06 AM, Matthew (Matthew) wrote: >I'm glad that it's so easy for you to change the content of this >site. However, try to look at this from the perspective of one of >your loyal minions. We know that you're just a guy in Oregon on a >rev. A iMac doing this. What you've managed to do with this is great >so far. Anything that makes it easier for you is a good thing. >However, most of us are adapted to thinking about things in a >different way, and it's difficult for me to adapt to this particular >system's way of thinking. Then I would ask you to do two things: 1. Let us know when something could be done "more to your liking" 2. Accept the fact that many people are 'adapting' to it quite well, and there are a number of sites which are growing very quickly (Dreamzone among them). Seth Seth Dillingham seth@macrobyte.net President, Macrobyte Resources (860) 572-0244 ======================================================================== 76 Dogwood Lane http://www.MacrobyteResources.com/ Mystic, CT 06355
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Matthew Patterson, the Paranoid Minister on 5/4/2000; 12:13 AM Discus is fine if all you want is a discussion board. But you know that half the people on Bulletin Brash Reflections don't even know the rest of the site exists. There is just way, way too much disconnect between the board and the rest of the web site. The discussion board is its own little world--the rest of the site might as well not even exist! Some people there have never heard of Phil Farrand, or his books. Does that sound like a good choice for my website? Really, for anyone's? I think that the separation of the Nitcentral BBS and the rest of the site is actually rather representative of what happened after Dell canned the Guides. Out of necessity, Phil became less and less involved with the site because he had to spend time working to support himself and his family. Thus, the Discus board was created: a self-sustaining community that wouldn't require Phil's constant monitoring and could carry on the spirit of the Nitpicker's Guild. It actually makes sense to me that there's not a lot of overlap between those boards and the rest of the site because, and I hate to have to say it, it seems to me that Phil has mostly put Nitcentral behind him. I miss the old Brash Reflections and Shameless Plugs for Phill Farrand's Books, but I think the Discus board perfectly represents the new spirit of Nitcentral. (It ain't even that new. Dell killed the Guides very close to two years ago, Phil's official announcement was made in the 5/15/98 Ask the Chief column, and the Discus board was created sometime late that September.) I think your problems are still just ones of presentation. The weird colors are my choice, and have nothing to do with Conversant. And I still think the things you like most about Discus could be solved very easily just by creating a non-threaded, all-on-one page variant of the Conversant display. I don't mind Discus if a board is all you want, but you can't really use Discus to link to, say, a particular story. If I want feedback for the Morgan Dilemna, Discus just won't let me do that. Not and put a link back on the web page for the Dilemna It's not in there! I think this would probably work out. I know that the weird colors have nothing to do with Conversant, but all the factors in viewing and using the discussion board are quite relevant to the user experience. (This is why Apple candy-coats half of its Macs: the outside as well as the inside of the computer is important.) I really do like the Discus approach to things, and if a variation on he Conversant display could be created similar to it I'd probably fall in love with it. There is nothing wrong with looking at this as a website with a discussion board. Bearing that in mind, what exactly (other than a post preview) do you want in a discussion board that you don't have here? Please be specific as possible. Post preview is a big one, although since I can edit my messages it's less important. But we'll get to that in a bit. A non-threaded, all-on-one page display like Discus would be another big one. Organizing things by that logic just appeals to me for reasons I can't adequately explain right now. And the editing the message thing bugs me. it seems to me that it's quite insecure. All I need to be able to edit my messages is my email address and password, correct? These days, it seems like everyone in America knows my email address, and passwords are laughably easy to crack. (Memo to me: must get the tech office to change my school network password.) I'm really not comfortable with the idea of someone else being able to go in and change my words on a whim. I find it really hard to place that amount of trust in someone that I've never met before in person. (There are days that I'm half-convinced that the Nitcentral discussion boards are an elaborate practical joke being played on me by Phil.) After all, over the Internet, there's no way to tell if the person you're talking to is a convicted bank robber or a commended war hero. Addendum: is Discus the only board tool you're familiar with? A lot of the things that bother you are present in other thread-based discussion tools, other than Conversant. Really. Most of them have toolbars like the ones on Conversant, and manage the messages the same way (look at one at a time). Bearing that in mind, what kind of presentation do you prefer? I see the main difference is that Discus has a topics list, then subtopics, and then subtopics beyond that. That is a different kind of discussion board, but again one that Conversant can, and almost certainly will, adopt in the future. A much more popular non-threaded discussion board tool is the Ultimate Bulletin Board. There is an example at the Web Pages That Suck discussion board. See what I mean about the topics and the subtopics there? I'm familiar with the more common methods of organizing discussion boards. Again, for reasons I can't describe adequately right now (must sleep on it), I hate hate hate the Ultimate Discussion board. I can understand the logic of using a non-threaded display as they do, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. I've also spent a bit of time on the forums provided by Bravenet, but the things are so slow even on my cable modem that I don't visit them much anymore. I suppose, really, that I'm not big on Web boards in general. I was pleasantly surprised with the Discus system that Phil used for the Bulletin Brash Reflections, but thus far I've only ever found one other site that uses it. Also, oftentimes it seems to me that people will trick-out the interface on Ultimate and other systems so as to maximally impede my ability to get the information I want and get out of there. To a certain extent, the MacAddict forums, powered by Ultimate, used to be like that, although it got better once they got rid of the pea-green and purple. I just like things to be as simple as possible, and thus far, Discus' method of organizing and displaying information appeals to me the best.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/4/2000; 12:29 AM 1. Let us know when something could be done "more to your liking" Seth--Matt replies to this issue in this post. I think we're zeroing in on the specific issues, some of them just personal taste and some of them perhaps of more general application. And to all you lurkers: the more diverse opinions on this matter, the better the end result. Weigh in, dammit!
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/4/2000; 12:48 AM I'll list some of the things I like about Discus, in a convenient compare and contrast format:
(For another version of the flat message format, see Metafilter.) This bit about editing your posts is not going to go away any time soon. Discussion group posts-cum-web pages are my primary submission tool. And Seth points out the real reason you can edit your posts--to edit your stories! If you go to your story, you'll find an "edit" button on the bottom. If I were to restrict editing privileges, you wouldn't be able to edit that page. I want contributors to have complete control over their words. You'll also find you can edit your bio. I still think the better solution for me is community reinforcement. If someone abuses the editing privilege, we all ignore them. When a post has been edited it screams "edit" in bright colors in the discussion group. If someone grabs everyone's passwords, I reset them all to shut the hacker out. If someone grabs my password, Seth does the same thing. If someone grabs his we drive to Connecticut in a panic. . . I mean, abuse of the editing privilege is no different than playing the Game or constant flaming. If most people play nice, and we shut down the bad apples, that will build the trust this site needs, in my opinion. Now. What exact features do you like about Discus? (Hint: don't expect to see those frames any time soon. Mark and frames are like oil and water.)
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Seth Dillingham on 5/4/2000; 7:50 AM
>I'll list some of the things I like about Discus, in a convenient
Thank you Mark, that's a very helpful list. I have certainly seen, here and in other Conversant-based forums, that we need the flat model also. As for Post-Previews... well, I like that idea too. >This bit about editing your posts is not going to go away any time soon. Correct. We're going to add the ability for a site admin to shut off the editing feature (which would prevent non-admins from editing the content of a message), but we cannot and must not change the basics of this system that allow it to be an editable Content Management System.
>I still think the better solution for me is community reinforcement. If I'm sitting just four feet from the server. If someone grabs my password (which isn't going to happen), I'll just change it manually. Seth
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: Mark Morgan on 5/4/2000; 9:39 AM Well, and to make it as clear as possible, when you do add the feature to restrict editing I probably won't adopt it, because I want contributors to be able to edit their contributions without me having to make them administrators.
RE: School English Classes and the Ramifications Thereof By: demonchild13 on 7/28/2006; 3:03 PM I agree, forcing someone to exhaustively read something over and over will make them despise it. It's happened to me many times during school.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright Notice | Privacy Policy | Contact | |
 |
|