Hey, what would it take to switch from the forum back to Allcom?

Black Rock Rangers Forums Forum Protocols Hey, what would it take to switch from the forum back to Allcom?

This topic contains 56 replies, has 36 voices, and was last updated by  Tulsa 9 months ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 46 through 57 (of 57 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #3697

    Easy
    Moderator
    9p

    @monochrome i got your email. did you do it through the forum or did you just copy and paste my email address?

    #3698

    Nekkid
    Participant
    5p

    BB – I agree as well. Ability to save as drafts in forum would be good. I know a lot of forum software has the ability to send PM’s (private messages) but I don’t see it implemented here.

    I keep thinking there must be a way, or ways, to merge the best qualities of the two systems. Damned if I have the tech skill to do it though, and I know it’s must be a lot more hard work than end users would probably be able to guess. Probably no system is going to satisfy everyone though. There were plenty who tuned out of allcom altogether because it was so cacophonous, after all.

    #3699

    Monochrome
    Participant
    4p

    Additionally, the number in the tip right corner of each post is a link to that particular post. So you can theoretically Email a fellow ranger with your comments, and a link to their post, but it’s clunky.

    #3700

    Monochrome
    Participant
    4p

    (And in answer to Easy, that’s what I did. Possible, but clunky.)

    #3701

    Sasquatch
    Participant
    8p

    I’m with BumbleBee. I read every post on OldComm because they were from rangers about rangers for the most part. I never understood the “bandwidth is limited” argument as my mind translated it into “my attention span and interest is smaller than yours” for the most part.

    Drinking from the fire hose indeed. Chaos anyone? Riding the edge of. Constant efforts to regularize and control communications at this level are to be expected. It’s what bureaucracies do. Are they to be rewarded? Even organizations have “knee jerk” or “instinctive” responses to stimulae. Just like individuals only with less humour and no consciousness of the limits which simple shame would impose on a reasonable individual.

    The forum format cuts down on back channel comms in that there’s no originating email address listed for the poster in this format. At the least, this will result in more frequent “paging” posts. If all those not participating in the forum at present ever actually sign in, that is.

    I frequently see a new post in a thread on this forum that’s basically “I agree” and have no idea what the topic was or where the thread went since it’s origination in the forum format leaving me confused and needing to log into the forum to re-establish context for that latest post.

    Allcom was simple. It wasn’t broken. It irritated some. A tiny minority really. Perhaps a tiny but influential minority.

    I’ll go with whatever there is to use but I definitely think Allcom the actual email list worked for me just fine.

    Sas

    <cite>@BumbleBee said:</cite>
    I preferred Allcom the email list. I didn’t like the whining about off-topic posts and dead-horse-topics. Not the off- or dead-horse-topics themselves, the posts complaining about them which always seemed to create more noise (and negativity) than the thing they were complaining about, and had a chilling effect on communication.

    But with Allcom, I had much better interaction and could choose to respond to individuals directly, conveniently, while keeping that within the thread of my email, etc. I could sort and archive and search topics easily in my email client. I could, theoretically, read Allcom offline and draft replies offline (perhaps good, perhaps bad if the conversation has moved-on in the meantime). Did I ever email a response that was regrettable? Oh, sure, but I also exercised the choice to draft response that I never saved, deciding whether to send later or not (often not, at least as drafted).

    And I was originally a proponent of forums, when I first joined Allcom, before I learned how to sip from the fire hose. I think the equivalent of a Google group–a group one could fully interact with either via email or a searchable forum–would be the best middle ground compromise. Especially if the long years of Allcom archives could be imported. (Yes, I know, have to keep the service in-house, I am saying the equivalent of, not to actually use a Google group, although that level of functionality would be awesome!)

    -B.

    #3703

    Lefty
    Participant
    0p

    • We will never get consensus re Allcom vs Ranger Forums, because they fundamentally serve 2 different communication purposes for Rangers.

    • We have a chance at consensus if the frame of this discussion changes to using both Allcom elist & Ranger Forums; and simple definitions of what communications are appropriate for each venue.

    #3705

    Monochrome
    Participant
    4p

    Enabling email replies, and having updates come “from” the reply to post address and go “to” the posting ranger and recipient,s emails as listed on their profiles would more or less allow rangers to relate to the same store of information in whichever method they prefer.

    How much time is required to code that is a different question altogether, but. . .

    #3712

    PopTart
    Participant
    0p

    Chiming in as a ranger that ignored Allcom due to the SN ratio

    The forum is much better IMO!!!!!

    #3713

    sharpstick
    Participant
    0p

    I’ve been on mailing lists, forums, etc. since the last century(BBS’s since ’84 or so. did you know that a below average typist can pretty much keep up with a 300 baud modem?), so I like to claim a bit of perspective on it.
    I like the ability to find the email etc. in a poster’s profile(as long as they have posted, or at least have a profile, although if they have never posted, a search does not bring them up.) this should eliminate most of the “paging whoever” posts that were prevalent on the old system. that is the only advantage I see in the new forum. If they have posted and you see a post from them, just click on the name under their pic and their info will show up if they have put it in.
    otherwise, it’s a lot like the FB generic pot of soup. It’s impossible to reply to an individual post. you can only add your post to the end, and if you want to comment on something that happened several posts ago, you will have to copy/paste in what you are referring to, or it will be totally confusing.
    to deal with the forum, I now have a link in my browser title bar that I can click on to go to the ranger forum top page. I then click on the recent topic on the left and wade in from there. I prefer the old system that allowed you to reply to the OP or the list directly.

    #3717

    Jester
    Participant
    2p

    Not to be too ridiculous here, but I might take a stab at bringing this back on topic.

    The title of this thread is about switching the forum back to Allcom. Perhaps I could project on to @pp’s intentions and suggest that he’d be happy if we left the forum up and got Allcom back up.

    So, people who know about these things: What would it take to get Allcom back on?

    If what it would take is a general discussion in this thread, cool. Because we’re doing that. If what it would take is a new volunteer to sort through Allcom so the person formerly in charge of the ardous task of head desking whenever there is a chicken bacon sandwich thread gets to focus on their other important responsibilities, please let us know.

    If the answer is “We don’t know yet, but let’s keep talking about it.” that’s totally understandable (and really, who could reasonably expect anything to happen with regards to this before the burn?).

    However, some of the earlier responses – like Tulsa reasonably asking how many people want to switch back, or k8 wondering if this format doesn’t do a better job of the intended role of Allcom[1] have been somewhat responded to by a fair number of people saying they miss Allcom in this thread, and the gaping hole where the incessant Allcom chatter should be less than 40 days before the man burns.

    Maybe there was an intended purpose for Allcom that the forums fill perfectly. But there was definitely a way to use Allcom that these forums don’t provide, and is missed.

    To be clear, I’m not saying it’s a closed case that Allcom should come back. I’m just asking:
    What would it take to bring Allcom back?

    [1] my apologies if I didn’t sufficiently explain your very valid points. I just picked those two posts because they were early in the thread and actually on topic.

    #3722

    Bourbon
    Participant
    5p
    Bloomington, IN

    @sharpstick said:
    … It’s impossible to reply to an individual post.

    Unless you use the handy “Quote” button and delete everything except what you’re replying to.

    @Jester said:
    Not to be too ridiculous here, but I might take a stab at bringing this back on topic.

    Sorry. Carry on.

    • This reply was modified 9 months ago by  Bourbon.
    #3724

    Tulsa
    Participant
    7p

    Jester,

    >> What would it take to get Allcom back on?

    When the forum was implemented back in February, the ability of list members to post to Allcom was turned off. A list admin could turn that back on, and then it would work as it has before.

    The reason Allcom posting was disabled was in an attempt to centralize the Rangers electronic communication here, in the Ranger forum. I think there are valid arguments on both sides of the question “should we have both Allcom AND a forum?”. Thus I think @pp really was asking for a switch back to the email list.

    My answer to @pp’s original question, “What would it take to switch back…”, is that all such things that have a widespread effect on the Ranger organization are brought up at meetings of our leadership groups. In an effort to better inform those groups I think it’s great that we’re getting some feedback on the issue here.

    I would bet that the forum detractors didn’t know there was much support among the greater body of Rangers (outside the leadership group). And in turn, the Rangers who have loved the forum may not have realized the intensity of the negative feelings about the forum that other Rangers have expressed here.

    The topic came up at a Council meeting this week, and is on the agenda for the Town Hall meeting. We are on track to effect change, if change is warranted. Please feel free to continue the discussion here. Rangers can be sure that their voices are being heard.

    - Tulsa

Viewing 12 posts - 46 through 57 (of 57 total)

The forum ‘Forum Protocols’ is closed to new topics and replies.