[C320-list] Architecture

Sun Aug 2 16:34:22 PDT 2015

Daryl,  What works for the vast majority of owners who choose to participate/monitor the 320 list may just continue to be the best process.  Having been an 320 Assoc. member for 20 years plus, I can attest to the email system vs. forum issues that recycle from time to time, and creeps up over and over again....but not because folks are resistant to change....but rather, because the email format is simple and affords immediate access and replies to/from the broadest range of members who are more likely to respond to owners seeking assistance. Must also consider the technology knowledge & background of owners.... and that may say something about the most readily available useful info presentation approach to the broadest number of assoc. members who care to timely respond/monitor to an inquiry & reply.

I have participated in forums as some are suggesting again, and often found some forums left me wanting because the reply time was often delayed and the replies were less robust vs. what I experience with 320 list email when the responses are more immediate and from more members who are monitoring email (from their homes, phones or even work locations). 

I suggest that you reread Jeff's recent  detailed post and reflect on what he has summarized. What you may be enjoying in the way of sharing knowledge and owner info today as a new owner did not just happen. From my experience over the years,  320 owners learned to use the 320 list and come to trust the owner sharing process using a simple tech access point via  email and that has persisted.... because it is reliable and the results are predictable. I do not see email as  maintaining the status quo, but rather affords boarder access a larger number of owners. As an association we  may be about to take a step backwards if we do not have a the right tech  person with the commitment to devote the necessary time and talent to replace an email list system that is working very well in an the effort to appease a "few" who want something more. Without someone stepping up with a multi-year commitment to devote the time, talent & resources to a more complex system by placing some "skin" in the game, I really am concerned about what will happen when Jeff's 320 term ends. Jeff Hare has done a terrific job over the last 12 years and I now am concerned that we may be losing an important resource when he leaves the 320 assoc. board.

One must also often be careful what they ask for because we may end up with something that is a change, but not an improvement. For example, with some forums (boats , cars, home DIY), there are some strict access formats that must be monitored to avoid tech corruption, inappropriate or high jacked postings in addition to virus  and other security issues getting not only into the more complex system, but also impacting adversely the users including  screening posts and replies.  I have personally witnessed a delay of some monitored  forums with posts delayed by as much as a day or more when I needed  an immediate reply. What works for the vast majority of owners who choose to participate/monitor the 320 list may continue to be the best process at this time. For me, the email systems seems to work for the vast majority of owners who are also association members.
Rick
1995 320 Hull #277

-----Original Message-----
From: C320-list [mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf Of Daryl Hunt
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2015 5:47 PM
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Architecture

Hi all,   I'm new to this group, just bought hull #660 Believe in June.  I respect Graeme's raising the question, and I tend to agree with the forum approach vs email.  I haven't seen anyone threaten to leave the group over it.  Change is hard and it seems the status quo's have it.   I hope we can get back to the C320 topics soon.  I've been learning a lot!

Regards, Daryl HuntBelieve #660

-------- Original message --------
From: pat reynolds <lorasalum at yahoo.com>
Date: 08/02/2015  3:46 PM  (GMT-05:00)
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Architecture 

Jeff,  keep up the great work,  Graeme, Bruce and Larry, good luck where ever you end up.  

     On Saturday, August 1, 2015 6:32 PM, Larry Smith <larrywindsmith at gmail.com> wrote:

 I wholeheartedly agree with Graeme & Bruce.
On Aug 1, 2015 2:01 PM, <c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com> wrote:

> Send C320-list mailing list submissions to
>        c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://lists.catalina320.com/listinfo.cgi/c320-list-catalina320.com
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        c320-list-owner at lists.catalina320.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific 
> than "Re: Contents of C320-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Forum "architecture" (swampcreek42)
>    2. Re: Forum "architecture" (Jeff Hare)
>    3. Re: Forum "architecture" (Joseph R Aberdale)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2015 10:32:31 -0400
> From: swampcreek42 <swampcreek42 at yahoo.com>
> To: C320-List at Catalina320.com, c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Forum "architecture"
> Message-ID: <n611v8lx1mrurr2pphpb7ohs.1438439551073 at email.android.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>
>
> I agree with Graeme on this, a forum type media would better. I deeply 
> appreciate the work and time that the people put into running this 
> site and wouldn't want to offend but IMO the email list isn't what 
> most people are used to in an interest group. It might even hold some 
> back from contributing. I find it more problematic compared to other 
> specific interest sites ?(forums) that I belong to. I made this 
> suggestion when I first joined as well but the prevailing responses 
> were to keep it as it is so I didn't discuss or bring it up anymore.
> Bruce Hunter?Nauti Time #719?
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Graeme Clark <cg at skyflyer.co.uk>
> Date: 07/31/2015  3:19 PM  (GMT-05:00)
> To: c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
> Subject: [C320-list] Forum "architecture"
>
> An earlier post by me generated a question about responding to list 
> messages without having to cut and paste.
>
> Until now - as a relative newcomer - (from foreign shores, too) - I 
> have remained silent, but at the risk of incurring the wrath of the 
> volunteers who look after this list I am now going to mention this 
> ?elephant in the room?!
>
> Why on earth are we using this outdated, email-list type of forum 
> architecture?
>
> It is clunky, and frequently, undisciplined use means that many 
> responses are posted with the inclusion of the entire list message or 
> the entire thread, making it difficult to follow. (Not least because 
> responding is not a simple matter of just hitting ?reply' in your 
> email program. You have to fiddle around and edit the subject title, 
> remove messages from other threads and so on
>
> You cannot even post messages from the web interface in Google groups 
> either, it?s ?read only?
>
> You cannot add rich text features like bold or italic, except like *this*!
>
> and its all so ancient an un-necessary!
>
> take a look here at the C34 owners site
>
> http://www.c34.org/bbs/index.php
>
> This is a standard message board format (available as freeware); you 
> can subscribe to receive new emails, choose to follow certain threads 
> or not, and so on.
>
> Guys and Girls - at the risk of upsetting someone,? this froum is the 
> technical equivalent of hemp rope when everyone else has moved on to 
> Dyneema, we are the typewriter to everyone else?s iPad, we are the 
> sextant to everyone elses?s GPS!
>
> I am more than willing to help us move into the 21st Century if its 
> help thats needed.
>
> Or am I missing a trick - is there some perceived benfit to the email 
> list that I haven?t understood or some trick to using it that would 
> make it less a labour of Hercules?
>
> (tin hat on, for incoming!)
>
> Graeme
> #366 Jaskar, England
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 12:11:28 -0400
> From: "Jeff Hare" <Catalina at thehares.com>
> To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] Forum "architecture"
> Message-ID: <050b01d0cc74$b9900340$2cb009c0$@thehares.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;      charset="us-ascii"
>
> Dear members.
>
> This is long but important as it marks a turning point.
>
> I'm really not trying to be a brick wall here, but since this is and 
> has been essentially "my baby" whether I really wanted it or not for 
> the past
> 12
> years, let's clear up a few things. I'm a professional software 
> engineer by trade with a background in electrical engineering. I sit 
> in front of a bank of monitors and write software for web startup 
> companies 10 hours a day as I have for years. I completely understand 
> this stuff inside and out at a level that makes most people run 
> screaming from the room.  :)
>
> So, first I'll state the obvious so we're all on the same page.
>
> Today we have an email based discussion list, not a browser driven forum.
> We
> also set up a Google Discussion group that is Read-Only for searching 
> ( **for now** ). Google is the undeniable expert in search. The reason 
> for an email discussion list is partly historical and partly because 
> it is incredibly easy for members to participate, even when out on 
> your boat in a harbor with very slow Wi-Fi or poor cell coverage. Try 
> browsing or searching a web forum from your phone or tablet with only 
> a single non-4G bar on your phone. Talk about frustrating!!! Text 
> based email on the other hand will come through quickly and you're 
> likely to get an answer to urgent questions just as quickly.
>
> If you want a place to carry on categorized social discussions, forums 
> are great vehicle for that. This was really intended to be an owners 
> technical support forum, not a social forum. So CLEARLY we disagree on 
> the intended goal here.
>
> I will add that searching most BBS/web based discussion forums can be 
> a frustrating experience because nearly all BBS systems rely on the 
> database engine text matching for locating results. That totally 
> stinks for finding quality results in context. Good contextual search 
> is *very* hard. The C34's forum is no different there. Quality 
> historical search is the reason for setting up an archive history 
> using Google Groups.
>
> Our discussion list *CAN* allow pictures, attachments, rich text, all 
> that and more.  That opens the door to viruses, inappropriate posts, 
> etc.. (a tradeoff).  We (I) deliberately operate it in plain text mode 
> because of the List's builtin archiving feature.  You can download all 
> the discussion list history to your laptop or tablet and have it 
> available off line.  These archives go back to October 2005 and cover 
> everything that was ever discussed here. You can see this in action 
> here:
> http://lists.catalina320.com/pipermail/c320-list-catalina320.com/
>
> The intent was that some volunteer or team of volunteers could use 
> these text based archives to produce a solid knowledge base of 
> information and best practices that has been captured in discussions 
> over time. Because they are plain text and require no special software 
> to read, that makes them a snap to copy/paste into any article or 
> knowledge base.  So that's something anyway that isn't *useless* as I 
> keep hearing.  I intended to write some software that would organize 
> and keyword index these to use on our website.
> Best laid plans...
>
> Ok, Great, or Terrible depending on which of the many sides of this 
> discussion you happen to fall on.
>
> The plan is (and has been for some time now) to enable social media 
> Single Sign-On into our website so that if you're signed into Google, 
> Facebook, Twitter or a myriad of other options, we'll be able to 
> authenticate you as an association member and allow you to participate 
> without having to sign in all over the place. Then we would make the 
> switch over so that you can participate in the discussion list through 
> the Google Group web interface, through email or both.  And it would 
> be second nature and just work.
>
> Just "wanting it" isn't enough to make it happen. There are many 
> safeguards that have to fall in place to keep things restricted to 
> owners and those who have a genuine interest in the Catalina 320.  
> This means writing and testing more custom software. No out of the box 
> system does this completely today.
> None. It has to be programmed into existence and maintained, or you 
> have to decide which of the features you have now you're willing to 
> give up in exchange.  There is nothing but a large set of trade-offs to make here.
>
> A new mobile device responsive version of our website was in 
> development as I write this. Frankly, it'll still take months more of 
> my time to complete, but it was coming together.  Our website is a 
> unique among most of the other association websites out there because 
> it was architected as a community site where individual members or 
> groups of members can be granted rights to enhance the site, its 
> content etc.. The new site work in development would be a major visual 
> facelift and also add new set of community features where members can 
> more easily add/remove content, articles, share documents, pictures, 
> videos and other knowledge base information. Does it need a content 
> reorg, absolutely. Are all the right features set up so that they're 
> easy to use? Not yet. Is the site searching up to google standards? 
> No, but leveraging google site search instead of database search is a 
> feature I was