Used to be we could just collaborate on one and then send it to Spike

*****

let's back up a bit.

Shortly after I started posting here there were several of us who thought that some new FAQ's should be done and others updated.

I ended up spearheading the effort to define what FAQ's should be done and b/c I'm an egalitarian it was a wide open and active discussion as to what FAQ's should be done and in what order.

I had been given the info needed to upload any FAQ's by Spike. He didn't do it, the person who was the current leader at the time, re FAQ's, was supposed to do it.

I had to stop doing that for several reasons and wanted someone to take over who would continue to allow for full discussion by the group.

So Paul took over and was given the info to upload any new FAQ's and that was done by Spike, not me, b'c at that Time Spike wanted to approve and have communication with whomever was in charge, re FAQ's.

At that time we completed the leaf form, how to prevent X pollination and starting from seeds FAQ's. And Paul uploaded all of them.

I do remember that there were restrictions on what could be posted in the FAQ's and one of them was links to other sites on the internet of which Problem Solver #2 has lots of.

I don't know what the philosophy of the current admin here is in terms of such restrictions, there were others that I've now forgotten, but the links one I haven't.

I also have very mixed, probably negative feelings about the appropriateness of using a thread as a FAQ.

We wanted to have a thread about seed sources alone and have it as a Sticky. We wanted to have a thread alone about links to pest and disease sites, also as a sticky. But Spike said that couldn't be done.

At one time the Pest and Disease Forum was very active and that's why P Solver #2 is there, but I also know that the number of persons answering questions there has decreased tremendously, and I'm one of them who seldom goes anywheres now except this main forum. There were not that many who did answer questions and felt comfortable doing so publically, and several of them have moved on.

And that's why more folks are bringing their questions to the main forum, but I don't see anything wrong with referring them to Problem Solver #2.

And if we're going to keep this main Forum and the Pest and disease Forum separate, as I think they should be, then the PS #2 should remain there and not here. It took us a lot of lobbying Spike to get the Pest and Disease Forum so I'd like to see it stay.

Populations of folks here at GW change via time and there's no way of knowing who will be posting here in future years.

I think you might want to contact current admin, explain what I've explained here and see how they are doing things these days.

Carolyn

You can't put links into FAQs.

Current management is not going to recode them so you can put out-links into FAQs.

You are limited to using one very small graphic per FAQ.

You cannot remove or change previous FAQs yourself and it is unlikely that previous FAQs will be deleted.
---------------

Personally, I was very frustrated by the graphic and out-link limitations in the FAQs. So I created a website to house the information I frequently referred to.

IMHO, committees suck--it's takes months into years to knock out what one person can accurately do themselves in a few days.

My suggestion is that you create your own website for information and do it your way. You'll save yourself a lot of headaches and aggravation by writing your own FAQs.

T

PS...it's a lot easier to link to your website if you're a .org, as a .com you're viewed as a commercial enterprise.

Thanks for the info you two.;) Yeah, I remembered the "no out-links" issue and all the other prohibitions from Spike-days - did a fair amount of writing and edition them back then - but thought perhaps it had changed with the change in admin. Alternatively, much of the info contained in the out-links in PS2 could be included, but not linked, in a FAQ with some effort.

And I too recall the fight to get the Problems & Diseases forum Carolyn, and even the one to get a Tomato Forum. ;) But things were a lot easier in the "good ole days". I agree that I would like to see P&D thrive again.

But, if I understand you both correctly, current admin isn't really interested in developing/expanding/correcting the FAQs, right? So I'll just continue to keep my own set of notes, links, clippings, etc. as always.

Thanks again.

Dave

But, if I understand you both correctly, current admin isn't really interested in developing/expanding/correcting the FAQs, right? So I'll just continue to keep my own set of notes, links, clippings, etc. as always.

****

Dave, I can't and won't speak for Trudi but the impetus for anything to do with FAQ's comes not from admin but from enough interested parties in a particular Forum.

And I see that the prohibition against links in FAQ's is still in place, as I supposed it might be.

And I said parties above b'c here's where Trudi and I have opposite viewpoints.

She feels it's easier and quicker for just one person to do all the FAQ's, as she has done in the past. And it is.

I, on the other hand, feel that it should be a group effort, even though it takes longer. And I also feel that no one person knows enough about all areas of a subject area to write all definitive FAQs.

Trudi, lest you get alarmed by my comment, I'm speaking for myself in terms of tomatoes in general b'c I don't know it all and welcomed input from others.

That's just the way I am. And well I remember our exchanged e-mails back when we were even trying to decide on FAQ topics in terms of you urging me to just write them myself as you do. But I just cannot do that, and wouldn't do it, and didn't do it. ( smile)

Carolyn

Carolyn and I often don't see eye to eye because we have differing ideologies on germination or seeds, but we both are keenly interested in and devoted to helping people experience the great joy they get from growing tomatoes ;-)

Writing FAQs by yourself is easier because you don't have to deal with "issues" from other participants, but certainly the research involved and also the work itself in writing them is more because you are doing it by yourself. However, personally, I'd rather walk barefoot over hot coals than collaborate because of the "issues" involved with being on a team. To each their own, some people love the synergy of team work, but I'd rather not.

I really can't say enough good things about striking out on your own and developing a site where you can present the information that you want to share in the manner that you want to share it. Always remember that what you've seen with your own eyes and your own experiences are valuable as reference resources. You can back it up with confirming out-links to extensions, govt sites, non-profits, etc.

Also, if you're a retired person, or close to retirement, digital documentation of your own agricultural history should be archived and preserved for future generations. I'll paste in a link to MSU CHARM so you can see how vital and important that type of archival and preservation project is.

T

Here is a link that might be useful: MSU CHARM

As far as the links in FAQ's are concerned, it is pretty ridiculous. If there are ideas/concepts that are important enough to include in an FAQ, put them in! If you need to get permission from the original author, do it. Explain that it's for a good cause and that it's not a commercial endeavor, and most will welcome that.

On the other hand, if you link to other sites that have membership requirements, then the average user is going to have to deal with the potential of the individual site administrators and their potential arrogance. What good are the links if the site administrators and the individual have personal differences or conflicts?

Another issue is that if those individual sites happen to be on one of the free hosting services, and that service goes away, that information is gone. If the individual is hosting the information on their own website goes down, again, that information is gone. There's no reason why the same information can't be in two places. Consider the GW FAQ's as a back-up of the original information.

I have built adn administered several hobbyist web sites where I did exactly as I have suggested, and have NEVER been refused permission to use the information, as long as credit was given where credit was due.

People don't want to have to link all over the place to find simple information, they want to find it all in one place. Any suggestions to the contrary are worthy of ridicule.

Geeze people, this is a hobby, quit taking yourselves so seriously!

--->Rob

Uhhh, thanks for your input, Rob. Given that we don't control this site and given the nature of the links and info under discussion, I'm not sure how relevant some of it is but thanks for taking the time to share it.

No offense Trudi, but I'd also come down on the multiple- input side of the fence. The old two-heads are better than one approach. Work by committee can be more difficult, true, but the end product tends to be of higher overall quality and carry more credence than just one person's opinion might.

Don't want to beat a dead horse but we used to just post a rough draft, allow 1-2 weeks for input and edit suggestions and then post the final draft. If no overwhelming objections it was posted as a FAQ. But that was before GW became so "politically correct". ;)

So given the current circumstances, unless someone from admin happens to read this and indicates a desire to work on the FAQ's, it is likely best to just continue as is.

Thanks again.

Dave

Dave uttered:
Uhhh, thanks for your input, Rob. Given that we don't control this site and given the nature of the links and info under discussion, I'm not sure how relevant some of it is but thanks for taking the time to share it.

Dave, I guess I'm not sure why you are against having a simple text file ON THIS SITE with a list of "Frequently Asked Questions" and their answers. Isn't that what this is all about, sharing information? Passing on information from the 'experts' to the neophytes? Are the admins here at GW afraid of the extra load it might cause on their servers/network? I would think they would be all for it since in increases their advertising exposure.

Considering you only joined in March, you sure seem to know a LOT about how this site works, and all of the people involved.

--->Rob

Most people would agree, government by committee is cumbersome and inefficient. It takes forever, if ever, to come to a conclusion.

And little ad hoc committees usually devolve to one or two people doing all the work and the rest of the members pleading "I got too much on my plate right now."

But if you really want an "egalitarian" approach, why not try something along the lines of a "wikipedia" FAQ?

Dave, I guess I'm not sure why you are against having a simple text file ON THIS SITE with a list of "Frequently Asked Questions" and their answers.

I'm not opposed to anything of the sort Rob! You have misunderstood what is being discussed here I'm afraid.

Isn't that what this is all about, sharing information? Passing on information from the 'experts' to the neophytes?

Yes, exactly. In fact a list of FAQ and answers already exists here and has for years. There is a master list as well as a list specific for each forum ON EACH forum. But apparently none of us can add to it or modify it any longer as we used to be able to do before the site was sold. Only the iVillage admin can do that now that they own Garden Web.

Are the admins here at GW afraid of the extra load it might cause on their servers/network? I would think they would be all for it since in increases their advertising exposure.

I have no idea. You'd have to ask them that. However as they already have an extensive advertising and market section on the site and since the FAQ are not usually advertising oriented, perhaps they don't feel it is necessary. Just a guess on my part. You'll have to take that issue up with them.

Considering you only joined in March, you sure seem to know a LOT about how this site works, and all of the people involved.

Yes, I re-joined in March true but was a regular here for many years. Spike (the previous owner) set up GW as a free gardening message board back in the early 1990's but in 2003 or 2004 it changed to a subscription service and I left then. All my "way things used to be" posts are just that - USED to be info that is no longer applicable - and only referenced because both Carolyn and Trudi were here then also.

My original post was just an inquiry directed at current members (and at Admin if they care to read it) about how FAQ modifications and adding new FAQ to the existing list are done here NOW that iVillage owns the site. Just that - nothing more - no agenda.

Dave

Hi hoosier - we were writing at the same time so didn't see your post till now. Sorry.

why not try something along the lines of a "wikipedia" FAQ

Now that's a great idea!! I could write up a Tomato Problem Solver wiki entry, links, photos included, and then just link to that in posts here. And others could add/correct as needed too. I think I'll go explore that option. Thanks for the suggestion.

Dave

PS: rest of the members pleading "I got too much on my plate right now." ROTFL - just came home from finance committee meeting at our local VFW post and I'll be darned if 3 guys didn't show up and gave just that excuse. You nailed it! :^)

Confucius say:

Man who have too much on plate get fat.

Fusion - who also likes the idea of a wiki