Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 20:04:06 -0700
Reply-To: wilden1@JUNO.COM
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Stan Wilder <wilden1@JUNO.COM>
Subject: Re: Organizing Vanagon Maintenance Information
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
My suggestion is that whomever is going to be the gate keeper on this
project, first gather Archives postings from list members known to be
credible in their individual fields.
Over the years many of the very credible list members have posted on a
variety of subjects.
Once these issues are satisfied then go forward with soliciting "Fixes"
and "Methods" for the multitude of minor maintenance subjects.
Stan Wilder
On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 19:14:29 -0700 Lee Roesner
<paradigm@allegraprinting.com> writes:
> Jeffrey,
>
> How much indirect "comments" or "conversation" do you want per tech
> submission. I would suggest no comment or conversation function on
> a
> submission. If you have a better/faster way, submit your solution.
> I
> wouldn't mind reviewing 2 or 3 "solutions" for a particular project.
> Some
> solutions might cover a particular tricky area better than the last
> or have
> better photos. The open forum at vanagon.com could be used to
> further
> question posted tech solutions. The database could always expand to
> allow
> "conversation" in the future too.
>
> Idea: I would be happy with listing most major category listings as
> a
> biginning and then people posting there own sub-category under the
> appropriate major category. Could even go 3 levels. Then each new
> subcategory that was created would then become part of the dropdown
> choices
> when a new submission is added.
>
> A quick search of categories and/or subcategories would get you to
> the
> category of your choice which would list all the available
> submissions under
> that category.
>
> Yes, leaving sub-category creation up to the submitter could get
> messy.
> Depends on how much upfront work you want to put into it. The key is
> to keep
> it all in database form. Then all this stuff can be reshuffled down
> the
> line.
>
> Just a few thoughts...
>
> Lee
>
>
>
> Lee Roesner
> Paradigm Graphic Design & Web Development
> 710-B Landwehr Road
> Northbrook, IL 60062
>
> Phone 847-509-8704
> Fax 847-480-5701
> PORTFOLIO: http://www.roesner.net
> THE B WORD: http://www.thebword.com
>
> > From: Jeffrey Earl <jefferrata@yahoo.com>
> > Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 09:17:20 -0700 (PDT)
> > To: vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com
> > Cc: wilden1@JUNO.COM, fourwdvw@yahoo.com,
> paradigm@ALLEGRAPRINTING.COM,
> > Thomas.Forhan@MAIL.HOUSE.GOV, jeff@TSSGI.COM
> > Subject: Organizing Vanagon Maintenance Information
> >
> > Stan wrote: "We speculated that 80% of the archives
> > are trivia and the remaining content is duplicated
> > many times, by many contributors."
> >
> > Stan is correct that the majority of the content here
> > on the Vanagon.com mailing list is of fleeting value.
> > Hell, half the stuff I've posted is just silly chatter
> > and certainly not worthy of being archived for
> > posterity. But aside from this chatter, what remains
> > is incredibly valuable info for the Vanagon owner, and
> > deserves to be properly cataloged and organized rather
> > than so easily lost in the mists of time as it is now.
> >
> > I see two ways to go about this:
> >
> > TECH REPORTS
> > The previously cited Syncro.org Tech Links
> > www.syncro.org/Links.shtml seems to be organized along
> > these lines. Individual 'reports' written by
> > knowledgable members are offered on a variety of
> > topics and strive to summarize all one needs to know
> > about, say, shock absorbers. A brief introduction, an
> > overview of recommended products available, followed
> > by an outline of procedures for changing your shocks.
> > This is arguably the most user-friendly route to go,
> > for its concise and comprehensive nature, but would
> > require contributions from numerous resident experts,
> > and would constitute a 'static' archive, with no
> > provision for the organic and free-flowing 'threads'
> > which are often so valuable when fixing your van.
> >
> > ONLINE FORUM
> > Not to hijack this list, but another Vanagon site I've
> > found helpful is www.westfalia.org. This familiar
> > InfoPop Forum structure is organized along the same
> > content outline as the venerable Bentley manual, but
> > strives to cover information specifically NOT included
> > in the Bentley. In fact, the moderator frequently
> > chides wayward members who post questions in the wrong
> > forum, duplicate previous posts, or ask questions
> > already clearly covered in the Bentley. The result is
> > a well-organized 'dynamic' archive of members' Vanagon
> > experiences and suggestions.
> > But unlike the Vanagon.com mailing list, Westfalia.org
> > has significantly less traffic and activity from
> > members, hence less immediately helpful information.
> > One can wait weeks for an answer, if at all, whereas
> > the collective and connected brain-power of
> > Vanagon.com often garners a helpful reply within
> > minutes. The forum also seems to be increasingly
> > populated by newbies who do not bother to read the
> > simple site guidelines, asking the same tired old
> > questions, and posting 'new' topics already covered
> > elsewhere. Such a forum structure would require a
> > moderator or gatekeeper to keep new posts in their
> > correct places, a time-consuming and daunting task
> > indeed.
> >
> >
> > Perhaps a combination of these two structures would be
> > beneficial: Tech Reports for a variety of topics, with
> > accompanying forum-style topics of ongoing and
> > immediate conversation, with little need to
> > keyword-search. This would offer what I perceive as
> > the better organization of some other sites, while
> > retaining the immediate and conversational aspect of
> > Vanagon.com upon which we have come to depend.
> >
> > "OK, I'll leave it at that since I've already gone on
> > for far too long about something I don't know a whole
> > lot about ..."
> >
> > Jeffrey Earl
> > 1983 diesel Westfalia "Vanasazi"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> > http://search.yahoo.com
>
>
>
| 
