 |
|
techumseh
|
 |
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:19
|
|
I'd rather wait for a little more feedback, Leo.
Last edited by techumseh on 20-04-2005 at 21:44
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Mercator
|
 |
Sorekara no Nanimo
Jan 1970
time: 06:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by curtsibling
I am sorry to rain on the parade, but roaming users are just
not going to bother learning web-page making or wiki-usage
just to upload a scenario. |
Sure, users shouldn't need to learn to make a webpage. But the only reasons why we would want them to do that is either for their own benefit, so they have their own little showcase (and won't find all their stuff lost when the forum dies again, and don't have to rely on others to get things back up), or so we can get more people to help out on the SLeague website.
Of course, if you just want to use the forum for everything, like it's been happening lately, that's possible too. But if we do that, our website becomes pretty much obsolete. And with that website the Scenario League's independence. Remember how techumseh and St Leo mentioned the Scenario League started independently from Apolyton. The Scenario League would cease to exist, except in name. It will just be a fancy name for the Civ2 Creation forum... Not that that necessarily has to be a bad thing either, I'm just pulling an emotional trump card. 
IMHO, a forum really just isn't made for complex structures and lots of downloads. That's what websites are for.
The advantage of a wiki is that it is just about as easy, if not easier, to update than a forum, but also has the advantages of a regular website. Why don't you have a look at the wiki references St Leo gave and try it out in the sandbox:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox
I don't think it's any more difficult than using vB code. It's just a bit different. (i.e. what CapTVK said)
quote:
Why not make a poll? |
Maybe we should, but a poll about what? Wiki vs. "normal" website vs. forum index thread? Then again, we could very well have both a forum index thread and a wiki. The question then becomes, what do we put in the wiki and what do we put in the index thread?
quote:
(...) and for dog's sake back it up properly? |
I don't think that's under our control. MarkG has already stated that it's impractical to backup the forum any more often. That's one of the reasons to also have a website.
quote:
For people who so recently were on the warpath about 'elitism'
and users being alienated, I find this new demand that people
'go and learn wiki/dreamweaver, or shut up' to be hilariously ironic. |
quote:
Seems now that we have a few people making choices
of the majority - Isn't that elitism, gentlemen?
PS
You may argue that we don't 'have' to post here, and
the admin run the forum without reward. but without
the posters you are kings without a kingdom to rule.... |
I'm certainly not telling anyone to shut up, on the contrary.
Isn't this a public forum we're on? What I'm wondering is, why the hell isn't anyone else giving their opinion!?
St Leo, techumseh, CapTVK and me, mainly, have been spouting ideas and St Leo and techumseh have been busy implementing them. If anyone else has any ideas, suggestions or reservations, or is willing to help out, for the love of Bob, tell us (and that's "us" as in the Scenario League, not just the mods or so)!
Since noone else said anything (until you did) how is anyone supposed to know what everyone thinks? Since St Leo and techumseh will probably be the ones who will have to implement this stuff whatever it's going to be, they just decided to do something.
P.S. Oh, and St Leo, "Brunhilda Thompson"?? 
P.P.S.  This has become quite the threadjack, hasn't it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Panda
|
|
Europe
Jan 1970
time: 05:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mercator
P.P.S. This has become quite the threadjack, hasn't it. |
Well if someone starts a thread entitled "I want my post count/title/avatar back" and we threadjack that with ideas for the SL website, then I guess we'll have gone full circle.
I must say though that I was concerned more with the propgation of directory threads than the website, which is why I've keeping a watchful silence. Using the forum is more democratic in that it is easy to post scenario work and receive feedback, and now I know that threads can link directly to file and images attachments in other threads I'm keener on this than ever. Plus with topped directory threads you don't need so many other sticky threads for, say, graphics, which gives newcomers a better idea of what we're about.
Having said that, the website is extremely important, and it wasn't that long ago that MarkG was openly debating closing the SLeague forum because the website had been so long without an update it was nearly dead, before the revival under St Leo. I would like people to start critical reviewing again, but then again some others may prefer feedback privately. So yes, by all means poll away! And while we're about it, how about a poll on how many people are entering SDC#5?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
St Leo
|
 |
Member of the Apolyton Social Democratic Party
Jul 2005
time: 00:19
|
|
Here's how I see things.
The site was dead in the water between 1999 and 2002 due to the departure of Blackclove et al. In May 2002, WarVoid and I volunteered to work on it anew. WarVoid experienced unsolveable FTP difficulties, and ended up moderating the forum while I updated the site.
I redesigned the layout and put up the current navigation structure. Eventually, Markos let me have a MySQL database. I took advantage of that by whipping up a new way of displaying downloads, reviews, links, and eventually news.
At various times, Boco and DarthVeda were recruited to help me out with the site, but the backend forms are rather unpleasant and not well documented, so they both kinda bounced off after a while.
Right now, I am the only one working on the site, and I've been doing a rather crappy job. The Spanish Civ2 Site particularly has been dancing in circles around us. I can't really recruit anyone else to help out, and making the required quantum improvement in the backend is beyond me.
Well, what are our options?
We can do nothing. The site continues to decay into bitrot while I add a file or two every three months or so. A Great Library thread on the forums can link to all the tips already there. Ditto for the reviews.
A blog? Well, WordPress is really pretty, but it can't do much beyond posting news. It would just be a different way of doing CivGroup news. Kinda pointless IMHO. (BTW, if you guys want to post news on the current website, I can fix you up.)
What else is there? PHPnuke sucks. It's ugly and unpleasant to use. DeviantArt is great, but there's no publicly available code and asking me to rewrite DeviantArt from scratch isn't reasonable.
A wiki like MediaWiki is ideal. We'll keep in place everything that's in place right now, but the wiki will be the first thing a visitor to sleague.apolyton.net will see.
We can slowly move everything that's currently on the site into one coherent layout. Reviews can easily be incorporated -- screenshots and all. Magazine articles will be easy to put up.
With a wiki, I won't be crucial to keeping the site going anymore. Mercator or DarthVeda or BeBro or whoever would be able to manage it just as effectively as I, whereas the current site can't be managed by anyone besides me. If I get hit by a car, someone will have to redevelop SLeague while juggling the two legacy versions around. A wiki provides for a smooth transition.
Again, all the current pages and content will remain in place.
I am asking for permission to move http://sleague.apolyton.net/index.php to indexold.php and make the new index.php a wiki. Comments?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
techumseh
|
|
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:19
|
|
Here's how I see things. The forum crash presented a real opportunity to reinvent ourselves. For various reasons, a redesigned SL site was seen as the key. I offered to help design one, and at every step I've consulted with members on the forum.
Concerns with the wiki proposal have come from a number of people, including Curt and Fairline. According to my count, only 3 people are actively promoting the wiki idea. I think many of us would just like to see how it works on part of the site first, on a trial basis. Maybe we'll love it. I can say that the wiki sites I've checked out, including the Freeciv one, are sterile looking.
I would like to see the new site design finalized and uploaded. I think the existing site should be left as is, as an archive. A few reviews can be transferred as can the tips if that's not too onerous - otherwise just a link will do. Otherwise, it's a brand new site. Content can be transferred regularly from the forums.
If you need some help, I'm willing and maybe others are too. I had access to the Cradle site for a while a couple of years ago and as far as I remember it was straight FTP. I don't know why SL can't be as well.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cyrion
|
 |
Caught somewhere in time
Jan 2002
time: 06:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by curtsibling
Personally, I couldn't care less about 'my' postcount, but
many newer posters will fall away now, demoralised at
losing so many posts....
The admin should do something.
|
Fully agree on this: I don't care much about my own postcount (once a king, always a king), but something should be done so as not to demoralize those for whom it matters! 
And then about more important matters: I didn't express on the new SL before because:
1) I didn't know much about the things proposed
2) and was too busy (shame!) to seriously reflect upon it...
Anyway, here are my 2 cents: as long as I can still use the forum as I did (with the threads proposed reorganization, which seem to make sense! ), and if the new SL isn't too hard to use (even for me... ), then I'll gladly accept any proposition on its structure!
And one more thing: if we can find a way to simplify the SL upkeep, that would:
1) allow St-Leo to update it more often
2) allow St-Leo to enlist help to upkeep the site (which would give him more time to, for instance, create a new scenario, which, if I'm not mistaken, he hasn't done in a while... )
And BTW: thanks to St-Leo and the others who spend time to maintain the SL and this forum! I really appreciate that!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
curtsibling
|
 |
of the Kill!
May 2002
time: 05:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by techumseh
Here's how I see things. The forum crash presented a real opportunity to reinvent ourselves. For various reasons, a redesigned SL site was seen as the key. I offered to help design one, and at every step I've consulted with members on the forum.
Concerns with the wiki proposal have come from a number of people, including Curt and Fairline. According to my count, only 3 people are actively promoting the wiki idea. I think many of us would just like to see how it works on part of the site first, on a trial basis. Maybe we'll love it. I can say that the wiki sites I've checked out, including the Freeciv one, are sterile looking.
I would like to see the new site design finalized and uploaded. I think the existing site should be left as is, as an archive. A few reviews can be transferred as can the tips if that's not too onerous - otherwise just a link will do. Otherwise, it's a brand new site. Content can be transferred regularly from the forums.
If you need some help, I'm willing and maybe others are too. I had access to the Cradle site for a while a couple of years ago and as far as I remember it was straight FTP. I don't know why SL can't be as well. |
This is how I see it...
I agree with techumseh's assessment.
And, if this forum gets screwed (again) because of a wiki transfer not working/being buggy/exploding...
....then it is goodnight vienna for this CIV2 community.
Although it is interesting how St. leo has now went ahead and
requested the ability to make this transition over the heads
of the posters...But we are told this is not elitism.
I am with Tech on the fact that a new site should be
completed, and the forum used as the main meeting place.
Tech's new site design has much promise...As always,
this forum should be the primary priority for the CIV community.
I also am happy to see the wiki idea given a try, as I know
they are useful (if concise and well-designed) but do not
be surprised at poster confusion.
What I am seeing is wiki being pushed in the face of any comments or other concerns.
I can see that various admin wish to keep the SL site active, and that is commendable.
If we are to try out wiki, why not experiment on the SL site's index file?
I should have much respect for St. Leo's efforts in staying
at the controls of the SL site, without reward or pay, but
we should see a trial run of the wiki that does not endanger
our community before we are forced into it at bayonet-point.
.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
fairline
|
 |
of the wing
Sep 2002
time: 05:19
|
|
I like the proposed look of the site put forward by Techumseh, and I'm still not convinced that the Scenario League site needs the level of open access to all material that a wiki would give. The one exception to this is obviously the tips and advice section where knowledge is being accumulated as time progresses. This has been asked by Tech and Curt already I think, so please excuse me if I've missed the answer: is it possible to integrate a wiki section within the overall framework of the SLeague site as envisaged by Techumseh?
As my ignorance knows no bounds on matters relating to website design, is there some advantage to using a Wiki for the entire site which I'm missing? Would this perhaps be the ease of setting the thing up and maintaining it which Leo has hinted at? If so, does this outweigh security issues which might arise due to vandalism (or just as bad the level of spamming we get on the forum) of an open site?
If the problem with using a traditional site format is willing helpers, then I guess it's time to put my money where my mouth is and offer my services; it's questionable how much use these would be, but I'm willing to learn
Some musings about the content of the new site, whether it's FTP or Wiki or whatever:
If I think back to what attracted me to Civ sites when I was a casual browser, I guess that there were a couple of things that made me add the site to my favourites. First and foremost, a good range of quality scenarios which are sensibly catagorised by genre/epoch are an absolute must. See the Spanish site as the ultimate model of how this is done; this was always my favourite site before I became a civ obsessive It would be a nice touch to integrate reviews with info about each scenario.
Second up, and this is no doubt going top ruffle some feathers, I loved sites with good replacement graphics; but then I would say that I suppose. Tips and advice about scenario design would be next up, followed by a 'beginners guide' page which describes in detail how to use scenarios, how to mod the game graphically, and which includes links to relevant tools (Mercator and Gothmog's sites) - take a look at this site for the flight sim EAW for an excellent example of the kind of page I'm thinking about :
http://www.xmission.com/~mmagleby/eaw/guide.htm
Any thoughts about stuff I've missed?
Last edited by fairline on 22-04-2005 at 23:47
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CapTVK
|
 |
Voorburg, the Netherlands, Europe
Jan 1970
time: 05:19
|
|
Yes, you can integrate a wiki with a normal website. Techumseh's website can perfectly serve as a framework for the entire site. A Wiki can form a subpart of that site and with the help of templates you can give pages created through the wiki the same sort of look as Techumseh's design. I don't know how far a Wiki's html layout abilities go, but you can do a lot of things, comparable what you can do with a homemade website as well.
The best thing is just try it out . Use Techumseh's layout and start small with a wiki for the design& tips section. Wiki's need to grow. If it works well, perhaps in the future we might decide to turn other parts of the website to wikipages too, who knows?
quote:
Originally posted by fairline
This has been asked by Tech and Curt already I think, so please excuse me if I've missed the answer: is it possible to integrate a wiki section within the overall framework of the SLeague site as envisaged by Techumseh?
As my ignorance knows no bounds on matters relating to website design, is there some advantage to using a Wiki for the entire site which I'm missing? Would this perhaps be the ease of setting the thing up and maintaining it which Leo has hinted at? If so, does this outweigh security issues which might arise due to vandalism (or just as bad the level of spamming we get on the forum) of an open site?
|
The main argument for a Wiki comes down to maintenance and generating good content with help from the community. Setting up a community site isn't a problem, it's maintaining one that's the killer.
Are there vandalism and security issues? Yes, there's a possibility for mucking up a page or spamming. However, because old pages are always saved you can easily repair the damage if need be. It would of course be reasonable to include logins for editing and adding pages and "lock" some pages against tampering. The Freeciv site does this for instance.
The best advice i can give at this point is to try it yourself. Go to the sandbox at www.wikipedia.org, type a few lines and see what happens.
quote:
If the problem with using a traditional site format is willing helpers, then I guess it's time to put my money where my mouth is and offer my services; it's questionable how much use these would be, but I'm willing to learn
|
And that would be a breeze with a Wiki
Last edited by CapTVK on 23-04-2005 at 03:05
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-04-2005 20:21
We can certainly use a few extra people helping out.
I am, however, fearful of plumbing the depths of your spaghetti. 
|