Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 43 users online :: 4 registered, 0 hidden and 39 guests


Most users ever online was 218 on Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:58 pm

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

Wiki Renovation- BCP Style.

Comments, Suggestions, Questions, anything to do with the website or community it's self. This is a place to express thoughts about making this community better.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Unread postAuthor: BC Pneumatics » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:27 pm

I am a very long winded person Jimmy. Maybe typing out a couple thousand words is a significant achievement for you, (though I very much doubt it) but it is rather commonplace for me. If we had stopped when I first proposed the idea I would have considered this conversation a short bout, not a flamewar as you do.

I will also not tolerate you trying to 'pull rank' on me in regards to how much I have contributed to the wiki. In my first 24 hours of editing, I had made more contributions than had every other member combined over the previous month. I have every ammo topic in the wiki printed out and covered with highlighter marks and notes in red ink sitting on the desk in front of me, so that I can find the best way in integrate them into one.

I have printed no fewer than 4 copies of the list that contains every topic on the wiki, and have assigned them a 1 through 10 grade on how urgently they need attention. Another copy keeps track of the topics that I am 'finished' with, at least for my first round of revisions. There is yet another I have filled with lines that map both current and purposed cross links. (Though Ben seems to be updating the links more quickly than I can find them) Another one of the lists is color coded to represent pages that may be candidates for consolidation.

Once I am finished working on the ammo pages, my hard copies will be trashed and I will print out some other group of pages, and go to work on them. I started writing a book on spudding about 6 months ago, and have since abandoned the idea in favor of video. I am now finding ways to integrate the 50+ pages I have written into wiki articles.

Do not act like I have yet to earn a status in regards to the wiki. I appreciate the hours of work you have put in, but do not disrespect or belittle my efforts, since day for day, hour for hour, I have done many times more good for the wiki than you have. Don't talk about that day some time down the road when I have earned my stripes. That day is as good as here, and no one is going to tell me that my efforts are still lacking.
  • 0

<a href="http://www.bcarms.com/"><img src="http://www.bcarms.com/images/store_logo.png" border="0"> </a>
User avatar
BC Pneumatics
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: Fresno, CA
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Davidvaini » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:33 pm

I am not going to say I have contributed a lot to the wiki, but I will stand up for BC. He has done a lot for the community here on the forums and on the wiki.

Jimmy, if you are mature enough, can we please reach a conclusion to which best serves the Spudfiles community without any more trash talking. I'm not desregarding your efforts to change the wiki, however I do not appreciate you disregarding the efforts made by BC.
  • 0

User avatar
Davidvaini
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:58 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: TurboSuper » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:03 pm

I'm going to agree with both of you. BC's analogy is somewhat fallacious: Driver's Ed teaches you how to operate a car. If one were to be taught how to build one, I'd expect all those things you mentioned to be included in the course material.

However, I'll agree that a massive block of text will discourage most newcomers, and that every nuance of information isn't necissarily pertinent to building a safe cannon.

Perhaps each article should have a "further reading" link, for those who are text-happy?


PS: Please feel free to fix up my little article on steel pipe, I'm not much of a pipe expert, but I thought it deserved some attention.
  • 0

Last edited by TurboSuper on Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If at first you dont succeed, then skydiving is not for you" - Darwin Awards

TurboSuper
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 1:44 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Davidvaini » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:08 pm

Yeah, I agree. How about this

BC way on the main page, then for those who want more technical information you would click a link called "Advanced information" to go to jimmy's page.

The majority of the viewers would be able to learn without falling asleep and the minority of viewers that would want scientific information would be able to access it.
  • 0

User avatar
Davidvaini
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1315
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:58 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Hotwired » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:14 pm

Too much unconstructive talk going on about editing.

The success of editing topics to be clear and understandable is best done with zero personal comments to other editors. Just edit it and stick your reason beside it.

Alternative edits may then occur and with any luck the most logical one stays.

Don't discuss it unless absolutely necessary, if counter-edited prove you're right (if you are) with sources not argument.

*has another rummage in the wiki for interestin' things to edit exactly as I please*
  • 0

User avatar
Hotwired
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2599
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 5:51 am
Location: UK
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: BC Pneumatics » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:20 pm

Turbo, I am not so sure you thought that through. People that build cars (the ones that haven't been replaced by robots that is) are taught practically nothing about the specifics of the materials they are using. Not even the people that design cars are bothered with it, the engineers that bring those designs to fruition are. Do you really think the guy attaching the interior dressing to a door panel was ever taught, for the purpose of his job, what the yield strength of the steel he was working with is?

I was trying to compare the amount of information required to build a safe cannon with that required to operate a car, something that is far easier than building one. To build a safe cannon you do not need to know that by breaking the bonds in a molecule of fuel, and reorganizing the parts into a byproduct of combustion you reap the benefit of the net bond energy in the form of propulsion.

Of course, just because you don't need it does not mean it shouldn't be included on the wiki. I do not think we need a "further reading" system though, since any topics that there is more information to be read about will probably be in the form of a cross link to an article providing a more thorough breakdown. The wiki has a counterintuitive nature in that the more broad and wide reaching an article is, the less it really has to say. It is more of an overview that will allow the user to follow links in order to get the exact level of information they desire on the exact subject they do not understand.

Of course there is a balancing act at work here. You must get the right level of information in an article, while having only the things that warrant their own page broken down that far.
  • 0

<a href="http://www.bcarms.com/"><img src="http://www.bcarms.com/images/store_logo.png" border="0"> </a>
User avatar
BC Pneumatics
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: Fresno, CA
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: BC Pneumatics » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:31 pm

Hotwired wrote:Too much unconstructive talk going on about editing.

The success of editing topics to be clear and understandable is best done with zero personal comments to other editors. Just edit it and stick your reason beside it.

Alternative edits may then occur and with any luck the most logical one stays.

Don't discuss it unless absolutely necessary, if counter-edited prove you're right (if you are) with sources not argument.

*has another rummage in the wiki for interestin' things to edit exactly as I please*


While I do agree with you (I have said many times that Jimmy and I need to shut up and just get back to work) I think that we are ultimately saving time.

Your ideal editing situation only works with ideal people, which I am not. I assume Jimmy has no problems admitting he is not perfect either. If we got into a back and forth editing war every time we did not see eye to eye we would indeed be making tons of edits to the wiki, but not actually getting anywhere. I am hoping this little shoving match between us resolves more than a specific issue, that is gets our obvious differences out of the way once and for all so that we can work side by side without conflict in the future.

Basically, I hope that this is the only thing the two of us need to get out of our systems before we can adopt your much more progressive form of working.
  • 0

<a href="http://www.bcarms.com/"><img src="http://www.bcarms.com/images/store_logo.png" border="0"> </a>
User avatar
BC Pneumatics
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: Fresno, CA
Reputation: 0

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: Hotwired » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:46 pm

Perhaps letting this thread die away and opening a new one might help.
  • 0

User avatar
Hotwired
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2599
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 5:51 am
Location: UK
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: BC Pneumatics » Mon Jun 02, 2008 6:04 pm

I have been thinking of doing that for a long time now Hotwired. I think you are right.
  • 0

<a href="http://www.bcarms.com/"><img src="http://www.bcarms.com/images/store_logo.png" border="0"> </a>
User avatar
BC Pneumatics
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: Fresno, CA
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: BC Pneumatics » Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:44 pm

I would like to let everybody know that the 'rift' between Jimmy and myself is over. We have been talking back and forth over PM's, and I have just sent the final one of the conversation. I do suspect he will write back, since he seems like the type who has to get the last word in, but I doubt I will even bother to read what he types.

Sadly, we were not able to resolve our differences. I feel that I made more than my fair share of effort towards restoring the peace, but he was very unreceptive to the idea. On principle I will not release the contents of our private discussions, but I will say that through them I found out Jimmy is the type of person that I do not like to associate with.

He proved himself to be disrespectful and arrogant, and made many offensive assumptions along the way. Jimmy is obviously very smart, and can teach many people some very valuable information. It pains me to think of what such a mind could have done for our hobby if it only had a better owner. It pains me even more that someone with a personality like his is representing our hobby. We work hard enough as a community to gain a decent reputation, and now we must all look like rude and crude individuals by association.

I am going to heed Hotwired's advice and make a new topic to discuss further wiki renovations. This time I ask that only those who care more about teaching others than they care about themselves join in the discussions.
  • 0

<a href="http://www.bcarms.com/"><img src="http://www.bcarms.com/images/store_logo.png" border="0"> </a>
User avatar
BC Pneumatics
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: Fresno, CA
Reputation: 0

Previous

Return to Website Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'