Author Topic: Bandit Alley 2007 (Read 8648 times)

Sven · « **on:** January 27, 2007, 03:14:16 PM »

Thought I posted this last week, but it either didn't save, or somebody really disagreed with me and zapped it! --SSS

After a couple seasons lurking at Bandit Alley before becoming one of the resident blabbermouths, I have both great appreciation for the friendly and helpful tone of the BA BBS and the amount of information that is hidden here.

When the Bandit when M.I.A. for a year in America, where we seem to have the bulk of our membership, I began to worry about the site/board's longevity. (Although one of BA's strengths is our non-American participation!) Now that the Bandit is back to worldwide availability (except the Antarctic dealership seems to be a non-event), I do think we should talk about how to capture the knowledge of BA in a more readily-digestible form.

Before I continue, let me please stress that I appreciate the work that has come before in creating the site & BSS, and am thrilled that it continues to do so despite the fact ain't nobody even axed me for fiddy cent for it.

So, here are some thoughts:

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT--We know there are topics/questions that just come up over and over again. (I think I asked many of them myself!) While the answers to some topics change over time (what's the best tire I can buy today?) but others rarely change, and technical guidance on specific models with never change. Researching the old and often duplicative threads is confusing and tiring, especially when someone gets a little huffy (but never rude) with a newbie and says "use search!". Perhaps the summary of our knowledge in these areas could be consolidated and presented outside the BBS format. For example, a wiki format would allow members to come to consensus, and display any dissenting thoughts, on a given topic while still providing a more concise narrative.

THE WEBSITE--It rarely changes. It has limited information. Navigation between pages is inconsistent. The site design and content need to be refreshed. Believe me, I *know* a lot of work was put into these pages to get them into the shape they are now, but the web is a form of publishing, and like other publications (or an old Ford truck) requires an overhaul now and then.

If others feel these are valuable activities, we have a lot of options. At least week's launch of the new slew of Microsoft products, I was particularly jazzed by the new Sharepoint Services. SharePoint is a great way to put together an information-heavy site for a group of people, with the ability to create web pages (create for static pages, as we would have) and a wiki interface that might fit our knowledge management needs. Some SharePoint services are available free from Microsoft.

I am not a programmer, but I do have other skills that I'd be willing to use to help us move towards Bandit Alley 2007. I am not running my mouth without being prepared to work.

I'm not proposing any major overhaul to the heart of the site, the BBS. Why frick with something that's not broken?

So, anyone have any thoughts? Agree? Disagree? Excited? Bored? If I'm alone in my ideas, I won't be hurt, I promise!

Red01 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 27, 2007, 03:55:47 PM »

Sounds interesting! Probably more so if I knew what everything you just said meant. I've heard of wikipedia, and I assume that's got something to do with wiki, but I never knew what wiki was, I just thought it was some sort of dictionary take-off website someone put together and gave it that name. I've heard the term SharePoint before, but don't know a thing about that either.

As far as the main Bandit Alley webpages go - they're all managed by PeteSC and his current employment has prevented him from keeping things updated - including the latest version(s) of the phpBB software that runs this board.

Sven · « **Reply #2 on:** January 28, 2007, 10:50:59 AM »

Loosely, a wiki is a website or page that can be edited by anyone (or any approved user). The theory is that the knowledge of the group exceeds the knowledge of the individual. So if this post was in a wiki editor, someone else would come back and revise it to improve the definition of a wiki. Of course, the theory is crap if it turns out that nobody is knowledgable enough about a topic to correct a common misperception!

Side note: I like Wikipedia, despite its potential for disseminating incorrect information, because it's like a distillation of the web itself...someobody somewhere feels compelled to provide detailed information on almost any topic, from pop culture (like the new show HEROES) to treatment for sports injuries.

As for Pete's lack of time: This is exactly why I'm proposing that we look at what can be done to make the site easier to administer and maintain. I appreciate his work and this site, and want to help conserve it for future generations of Bandit owners!

Red01 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 28, 2007, 11:44:54 AM »

So you've got the ball... you wanna run with it?

Rocketboy · « **Reply #4 on:** January 28, 2007, 02:02:23 PM »

Interesting thing i read as far as the potential for disseminating disinformation on Wikipedia. Someone at some college got themselves a grant and decided to do a study on the accuracy of Wikipedia compared to the accuracy of published encyclopedias and found that the the percentages were virtually identical. i would think especially on this forum, if someone posted something straight up wrong, there would be several people who would know better and correct it.

And i apologize for my lack of specific sources, it was a while ago i read it and i just can't even begin to think of where to look.

Sven · « **Reply #5 on:** January 28, 2007, 08:53:55 PM »

Rocky, you got it right, at least as far as one study went. Wikipedia has been analyzed and found to be as correct as Encyclopaedia Britannica. But there was also news last year of an article that was intentionally wrong as joke.

Any wiki product is going to require the community of users to self-police. (Which is sort of what happeneds in the BA BBS already.) And a wiki can also be set to restrict authoring to selected users and require peer review, which is more analogous to publishing.

I find a wiki product to be more responsible journalism than blogs, which are just one person's spew with no oversight. The original term (pronounced "weekee", from a Hawaiian word meaning "fast" or "quickly". Now I'm hearing it pronounced "wikki" and the definition backward engineered to stand for "what I know is...".

Anyway, the wiki aspect isn't a the crux of what I'm proposing, although it's an option. I'm not a server admin (and I don't play one on TV) but I do have other skills that I'd be willing to use to help with this potential project. So this has to be a group effort of interest to the BA community as a whole.

There's time to let a few more people weigh in, anyway.

txbanditrydr · « **Reply #6 on:** January 28, 2007, 09:33:50 PM »

So how does (or would) a wiki be different than say... the FAQ's - that nobody seems to read before posting their tireoilchainlube question??

Sven · « **Reply #7 on:** January 29, 2007, 05:05:59 PM »

Overall, what I'd like to see would be individual articles that capture the summary on knowledge for various recurring topics. The FAQs are an attempt that this; some are individual postings created just for the FAQs, some are transcriptions of conversation threads. What I'd recommend is use of a more traditional web interface for that type of topic, getting it out of the BBS format. This doesn't require a wiki interface, but the wiki interface allows the community ti add/edit articles rather than putting the responsibility on one person to first recognize what needs an article, and then to author it.

You also bring up the question of how to do you get people to look at what's already available before posting redundant questions. My experience running a customer service center is that there is no customer-friendly way. But even if someone does post a question that has an article available, the information will be available and will not depend on who chooses to respond.

Red01 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 29, 2007, 05:31:15 PM »

Moved this to a section higher on the board so hopefully more will see and respond to it.

pmackie · « **Reply #9 on:** January 29, 2007, 08:52:22 PM »

Sven, you make some good points here. How do we get this started? What changes need to be made. Is this something you can do if given Admin privledges?

I think your point is valid, build an updateable knowledge data base outside of the BBS that can be refered to (as opposed to, or in addition to the FAQ section).

How do we get there, and who does the work?

aussiebandit · « **Reply #10 on:** January 29, 2007, 09:02:32 PM »

I'm all for anything that makes it easier to get the info you're looking for.

I have to admit to being one of the people who will post a question rather than spend an hour trying to find just the right thread that deals with the problem/question.

scooter trash · « **Reply #11 on:** January 30, 2007, 10:12:07 AM »

Does anyone know what's the best chain lube to use ???

(sorry Sven, I couldn't help myself)

Quote

I'm all for anything that makes it easier to get the info you're looking for.

stormi · « **Reply #12 on:** January 30, 2007, 02:13:44 PM »

Quote from: "pmackie"

Sven, you make some good points here. How do we get this started? What changes need to be made. Is this something you can do if given Admin privledges?

I think your point is valid, build an updateable knowledge data base outside of the BBS that can be refered to (as opposed to, or in addition to the FAQ section).

How do we get there, and who does the work?

Admin privileges would only allow him to admin the board from inside it.

Access to the webserver, a la the way that Pete can access it, would allow him to install the software required to do this, but I doubt that will be forthcoming. I'm not browbeating Pete for that, I wouldn't provide that info either, in his shoes.

Now, here's the thing. The easiest way to do this would be:

Create a companion site to banditalley. I'm not suggesting replacing, just supplementing.

This would allow for updates and changes to be made to the wiki software, et al, without Pete needing to be present. Admin privileges could be given to someone who knows webservers, and to someone responsible for overseeing, or admining the content.

It will however need Pete's involvement initially, in order to create the links and otherwise that will join the two, unless it were to be done through sticky posts in the forums.

It would also not be a bad idea to run this by him, so it doesn't seem like anyone is trying to usurp all of what he's built.

Here's the thing about this though. By creating the companion site, there will be costs involved. Hosting, Domain registration, etc. Essentially, we'd be doubling the costs of running the site.

Sven · « **Reply #13 on:** January 30, 2007, 02:49:19 PM »

Quote

Create a companion site to banditalley...It would also not be a bad idea to run this by him, so it doesn't seem like anyone is trying to usurp all of what he's built...By creating the companion site, there will be costs involved.

Please note, I am just socializing the idea that the site (the level above the BBS) needs a refresh, and exploring options for preserving knowledge. I don't see the need to build a duplicative site. One option would be to replace the original site with another site or another solution, such as but not limited to SharePoint. Or the current site could be updated and serve as the "front door" for the whole BA concept, with the BBS and a SharePoint interface (or whatever we use for stored knowledge) as subsites, pretty much as the BBS is now.

I am not a server admin, and I was very careful to express my appreciation for what has been done to date. I don't know Pete personally, but can neither imagine that we would do anything without his approval, or that he himself doesn't see things he would change if he had the time to do so.

I appreciate the serious level of the discussion, and there is no deadline requiring that any decision be made immediately. It's encouraging to know that others value the site's content and see opportunity as I do. Let's keep the discussion going until we find the right answers.

stormi · « **Reply #14 on:** January 30, 2007, 03:01:25 PM »

Quote from: "Sven"

I don't see the need to build a duplicative site. One option would be to replace the original site with another site or another solution, such as but not limited to SharePoint. Or the current site could be updated and serve as the "front door" for the whole BA concept, with the BBS and a SharePoint interface (or whatever we use for stored knowledge) as subsites, pretty much as the BBS is now.

I didn't think anything would be duplicated either. I was mostly looking at a way to do what you want to do, but without having to -require- Pete's time to do it. That's why I mentioned a companion site, to imply that it wasn't meant to take over the content from the Alley.

There are tons of free wiki softwares out there. I personally would be reluctant to go with the microsoft solution for a few reasons.

1. It's Microsoft. They may abandon it, they may decide it's not free anymore, they may decide that you need x number of CALs (client access licenses) to use it.

2. It limits the number of servers that it can be run on. For instance, chances are that it couldn't be run on the server that currently hosts bandit alley, as it's not a windows server.

Quote

I am not a server admin, and I was very careful to express my appreciation for what has been done to date. I don't know Pete personally, but can neither imagine that we would do anything without his approval, or that he himself doesn't see things he would change if he had the time to do so.

Sven, I wasn't attacking you or your idea. I was merely mentioning some of what would be involved and a possible solution. I am sure that Pete would love to have more involvement here, but also know that he simple doesn't have the time currently. That's why I mentioned the possible way around that.

I -am- a server admin, and so I made suggestions.