CWDF - Wiki - Opinions?

[enigmatic]

20 hours ago, tree monkey said:

I don't like the idea, not because I'm against the concept specifically but more because this place lives or dies on discussion and even though it can be frustrating for the old hands to see the same topics raised time and time again the forum needs new members and that's how new members get involved, by asking questions.

 

And I have a real soft spot for the forum and we need new involved members 

Think of it the other way: instead of new members coming in and being scared off by the replies because so many of them are jokes they think the person asking for photos or explaining they've got the wrong idea is also mocking them, they can get a useful link, and then come back to the forums when they have a slightly more informed variant of the question or something different to ask...

 

 

[Paul C]

There will (probably) be less discussion as a result of a wiki, but it would be of higher quality.

[TheBiscuits]

33 minutes ago, Paul C said:

There will (probably) be less discussion as a result of a wiki, but it would be of higher quality.

 

I suspect the opposite would be true - the signal-to-noise ratio would tilt strongly towards noise if all the sensible factual information were to be stored in a wiki.

[jet_]

On 18/02/2023 at 20:44, TheBiscuits said:

 

I suspect the opposite would be true - the signal-to-noise ratio would tilt strongly towards noise if all the sensible factual information were to be stored in a wiki.

Having seen wikis grow in multiple online communities this isn't really the case. The wiki begins to contain a lot of solid baseline information which is useful to everyone, but discussion about specific subjects is still very much alive. In the world of boating, there is an awful lot of indisputable, factual baseline information, but also a lot of boat-specific and troubleshooting questions which can continue to spur high quality discussion. The signal-to-noise ratio is already pretty bad in many places (for example, I was reading an older thread about HVO fuel the other day which contained more posts about propellers than it did about the topic subject, which would be fine if it were in its own topic; but going off topic is extremely common here). 

 

I know I don't have many posts here but have been reading the forum extensively for some time and have used it as a knowledgebase to search for lots of things, so I believe a wiki would be amazing for organizing pertinent information in that way.

Edited February 23, 2023 by jet_
typos

[rusty69]

66 votes 

32922 members

 

The number of votes indicate that it probably isn't worth the effort

 

Maybe time to open the voting up to the Bots

Edited February 23, 2023 by rusty69

[sigsegv]

21 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

66 votes 

32922 members

 

The number of votes indicate that it probably isn't worth the effort

 

Maybe time to open the voting up to the Bots

idk dude, 66 is probably pretty representative of the number of *active* posters on the board

[rusty69]

2 minutes ago, sigsegv said:

idk dude, 66 is probably pretty representative of the number of *active* posters on the board

Exactly, and with only 28 in favour (so far), probably not worth the effort.

[RichM]

We definitely have more than 66 active members but for sure, the overall poll response thus far is somewhat disappointing. It's hard to gauge whether or not something is worthwhile if we don't get much in the way of feedback. Raw numbers are obviously a good (but not only) measure of that.

 

That said I appreciate everyone who has taken the time to vote and give their views. 

[rusty69]

17 minutes ago, RichM said:

It's hard to gauge whether or not something is worthwhile if we don't get much in the way of feedback

Is it? I would of thought the lack lustre response is the result.

I suppose there could be thousands of viewers of this thread who might want a wiki but are too shy to join.

[TheBiscuits]

Get the dozen who want to contribute to post their contributions in a dedicated thread - if the quantity and quality of submissions is there it's a simple copy and paste to start a wiki.

 

Content is king as we used to say before the internet became mostly cat videos ...

[Tony Brooks]

It could start by the pinned topics in equipment and maintenance etc. They will probably need editing, but it will give a start, so it can be judged if it is worth carrying on.

[rusty69]

Bumpety bump

 

Last day 

Edited February 24, 2023 by rusty69

[MtB]

I find it puzzling that 32% have voted a straight "No", they don't want a wiki. 

 

If other people on here want to write a wiki, why on earth would the people here with no interest feel moved to actually oppose it?!  

[rusty69]

17 minutes ago, MtB said:

I find it puzzling that 32% have voted a straight "No", they don't want a wiki. 

 

If other people on here want to write a wiki, why on earth would the people here with no interest feel moved to actually oppose it?!  

I never understand the options in these polls anyway, and rarely participate. I mean, what does indifferent or abstain mean?

 

Surely the only metric worth bothering with is if a huge proportion of the forum vote in favour of having a wiki, and at least some people offer to participate in it's contents.

[MtB]

Just now, rusty69 said:

I mean, what does indifferent or abstain mean?

 

"Indifferent" is easy. It means you are almost indifferent, just not quite indifferent enough to ignore the poll.

 

"Abstain" is a lot trickier. I think this category should be re-named "I don't care one way or the other but I just LURVE voting in polls".

 

 

[rusty69]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

"Indifferent" is easy. It means you are almost indifferent, just not quite indifferent enough to ignore the poll.

 

"Abstain" is a lot trickier. I think this category should be re-named "I don't care one way or the other but I just LURVE voting in polls".

 

 

Damn, I've run out of greenies today,I'll have to go and take one away from Athy so I can award it to you. Hang on.

[RichM]

10 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

I never understand the options in these polls anyway, and rarely participate. I mean, what does indifferent or abstain mean?

 

Surely the only metric worth bothering with is if a huge proportion of the forum vote in favour of having a wiki, and at least some people offer to participate in it's contents.

 

In hindsight it may have been better to name the options

 

•  Yes, interested
• No, not interested
• Indifferent (Don't care either way)
• Abstain 

The reason I put "Abstain" as an option is because it used to be that the forum system wouldn't let people see the poll results unless they have voted and some members may not wish to vote. Thus, they have the option to abstain from doing so.

[rusty69]

3 minutes ago, RichM said:

The reason I put "Abstain" as an option is because it used to be that the forum system wouldn't let people see the poll results unless they have voted and some members may not wish to vote. Thus, they have the option to abstain from doing so

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.

[doratheexplorer]

37 minutes ago, MtB said:

I find it puzzling that 32% have voted a straight "No", they don't want a wiki. 

 

If other people on here want to write a wiki, why on earth would the people here with no interest feel moved to actually oppose it?!  

I put no because I think a wiki is a bad idea.  Simple really.

[MtB]

7 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I put no because I think a wiki is a bad idea.  Simple really.

 

So you actively oppose other people writing themselves a wiki on here? 

 

Why? Do you think it will affect you adversely in some way?

 

 

 

 

[doratheexplorer]

6 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

So you actively oppose other people writing themselves a wiki on here? 

 

Why? Do you think it will affect you adversely in some way?

 

 

 

 

Yes.  I've already answered this earlier in the thread.

[MtB]

The thread is TL:DR.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, MtB said:

The thread is TL:DR.

 

Took me 15 seconds to find Dora's post.

[rusty69]

Last bump and my work here is done. 

 

Roll up

Roll up 

You only have a few hours left to make you're opinion known in this very important CWDF poll. 

[TheBiscuits]

9 hours ago, MtB said:

I find it puzzling that 32% have voted a straight "No", they don't want a wiki. 

 

If other people on here want to write a wiki, why on earth would the people here with no interest feel moved to actually oppose it?!  

 

Have you actually read the question?

 

"Would you like to see a CWDF Wiki or similar?"

 

How you get from "No" as an answer to the actual question to thinking we oppose it and want to prevent others doing so I'm not sure ...