Website contributions (Was: Re: The site is down)

[Craig White]

On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 16:21 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
> On Wed, September 6, 2006 3:23 pm, Mike Schwartz wrote:
> >
> > I may not be [completely] keeping up, here (sorry),
> > but I thought that ("allow members to contribute to the site")
> > was what a wiki was for;
> > (also, an archive of the mail lists, such as this one...)
> > just 0.02,  ...from:
> 
> Wikis are great for user contribution.  You are correct.  I don't remember
> all whys for it back whenever but we determined that something between
> static HTML and a wiki would serve better.
> 
> Joomla! (http://www.joomla.org) is a Content Management System (CMS) that
> allows control over content and structure while allowing contributions
> from many people.  The way PLUG uses it was untented to provide the
> following conceptual operation:
> 
> - Every user who registers is set to "Author" access level.
> - All Authors are allowed to submit new articles, links, reviews, etc.
> - Then, a team of "Publishers," a least two for each section, would review
> submissions for content and appropriateness.
> - Right away or perhaps after a few revisions with the Author, they would
> Publish the submission to the site for all to see.
> - Articles would be submitted.
> - Admin work would be handled by a team of people.
> - Everyone has the opportunity to contribute.
> - Spam and inappropriate content is vetted.
> - All is right with the world.
> 
> The reality that has turned out is:
> 
> - Every user who registers is set to "Author" access level.
> - All Authors are allowed to submit new articles, links, reviews, etc.
> - A team of "Publishers" was started but faded away for whatever reason.
> - Articles and other content are rarely submitted, consisting mostly of
> job postings.
> - Admin work is done by me, which I neglect from time to time.
> - Everyone has the opportunity to contribute but very few do.
> - Spam and inappropriate content is vetted.  (Easy with few submissions.)
> - The site goes stale and has little content beyond meeting announcements.
> 
> Based on this experience, and assuming that past performance indicates
> future results, I'd say a wiki would get a flurry of contributions for a
> few months and then fall into staleness and meeting announcements.  Maybe
> I am wrong about that but there currently is no clamor for submitting
> content.  I don't think changing the submission process will have that
> much of an effect.
----
I think the focus wasn't clear and the objectives muddy.

Most activity tends to occur at the project level whereas PLUG is a
regional and not project centric. So it seems that much of the content
isn't gonna reach the wider audience. I think it needs to focus on
things like...

- regional events
- regional news
- regional blogs / and perhaps blogs is the one area where there could
be a lot of interest/activity

As for the dog and pony shows known as East Side / West Side
meetings...that's been done for so many years that it's a somewhat tired
format that isn't going to draw a lot of people to them.

I hate to come off as negative because I don't want to discourage anyone
nor diminish their efforts.

Craig