Regarding Loring's excellent FAQ...

[Sam Conder]

Loring has worked very hard over the years to author and maintain a great BT3x00/BT3Central FAQ file. Recently, due to changes at his ISP and beyond his control, the FAQ has gone missing. I have often thought of trying to figure out a way to bring his FAQ "in-house" and have narrowed doen some ideas:

• Keep it "as-is", i.e. a PDF file that is simply downloaded from the site
• Integrate it into the vBulletin FAQ accessed via the "wooden" navigation bar at the top of the site.
• Create a BT3Central Wiki and let the community build and maintain it.

Personally, I dig solution #3. There would of course be limitation on who can add to or edit the Wiki, probably based either simply on the length of time one has been a BT3Central member as well as the member's reputation level. This would all be handled automatically by software and would require very little human intervention to maintain.

There is no doubt that solution #1 would be the easiest. However, maintainence of it is more difficult. Additionally, there's the old "If something ever happens to Loring" factor. Sorry Loring, I hate to discuss your demise.

Solution #2 would be slick and elegant, but has two drawbacks that I can see so far. First, I'd have to do a little administration in order to set someone other than myself up as the maintainer. Also, people have a tendency to overlook or discount the "FAQ" links on forums because they rarely contain any useful info.

At this point I'm merely thinking out loud. However, I'd love to see a discussion about this and get an idea (or ideas) of what people think.

Discuss.

[LarryG]

Regarding Solution #3 ...



Solution #3 is the way to do it, absolutely! That'd be cool/fun/flexible/dynamic/etc.

EDIT: It occurs to me, belatedly, that I should mention that Loring has done a fine job with the FAQ and my preference for Solution #3 is in no way a commentary on the effort he's made to date.

But with that said, the nature of the information this particular FAQ should contain is less cut-and-dried, less black/white, than many FAQs are. Personal preference plays a big role in woodworking, as does one's tooling and experience level. A wiki system would allow us to easily accommodate multiple authors, each of whom may have a slightly -- or radically -- different "take" on a given question or problem. (Speaking of that, I'd like to see the various comments identified by author.)

That's the main reason I like Solution #3: it has the potential to be a collaborative system with a lot of different viewpoints. Each would be thoughtfully presented, but in the end, the reader will still have the opportunity to choose for himself.

[radhak]

An 'our own wiki' would be awesome! I have been thinking about this for some time, and feel this is very much needed for our community.

I think we could start with Loring's FAQ, and down the line it could sub-categorize, etc.

As for editing rights, if we look at that venerable veteran : Wikipedia is a virtual free for all, but it has come along pretty nicely.

But for the sake of consistency, you could mandate a minimum number of posts before they could 'wiki', say 100 posts (thats the limit for the 'newbie', IIRC), or something.

Personally of course I'd be glad to be a consumer of the inputs from all the veterans here (whether new to BT3C or not).

Go Wiki!

[TheRic]

Loring: THANKS!!!!!!

#3 sounds great. Wiki has some articles locked and only a certain group can modify them. Maybe something like this would work. Maybe a few veterans that have some good writing skills would like to oversee the articles that are posted.

If there is consistent flow to the FAQ it makes it easier to read. A group could help keep that flow consistent, clean up grammar, spelling, etc.

[onedash]

I think #3 sounds pretty cool too. It would be more than a FAQ though I think. if it has a good search capability I think a lot of the posts that come up several times a year would be answered in there.
And tool reviews I think would be pretty awsome if you could search by model or brand or type and have multiple opinions.

[Sam Conder]

If this storm hits as forcasted, I may have some "play time" tomorrow to look into the Wiki...

http://www.weather.com/outlook/recre...rs/local/40347

[bmyers]

http://www.wpsee.com/pdfs/FAQ_BT3_rev4.pdf

I was just keeping it safe.


Option #3 sounds like the right thing to do.

Bill

[Kristofor]

First, Loring, great job on the FAQ, that can be a tough job, but I know I used it often for myself and pointed others there on occasion.

Wiki is a great way to go in the future, it shares the workload and facilitates frequent updates.

It's a nice collaborative model, and on a subject like this I can't even see where there'd be much in the way of manipulation of data (I don't see other manufacturers trying to slip in skewed info to make Ryobi look bad, etc.)

Kristofor.

[Stormbringer]

Another vote for #3.

Besides Loring FAQ, some others that come to mind could be Dustmights excellent saw blade analysis and recommendations, and the post of tweaks that always pop up when someone mentions they got a new BT or craftsman...I forgot who wrote it Crocket? Linear? Sorry, regardless, it's very informative.

Something beneficial to router newbs would probably be identifying the differences, pros, and cons about the many routers currently available.

I'd better stop before I get too far ahead of myself.

Greg

Something devoted just to jigs would be kewl. Hey I like that "Just Jigs"

[JSCOOK]

option 3 .....

[Black wallnut]

As much as I like #3 I have to mention to those that were not here that in the early days a FAQ committee was formed and after considerable time Loring took it upon himself to finalize what became his creation. We on the committee gave input but with out Lorings gallant efforts I'm thinking it would still be bound up in committee. So i ask "What say Loring?"

If option #3 I personally would like editorial powers only to members with rather high post counts, (500+) and Patron status. and Forum membership of at least one year. That should by design limit the number which should ensure the FAQ's integrity, which IMHO is paramount.

[TheRic]

I know how committees work (or don't). But I'm thinking if a group or a person per "section" looks over things before they are posted might make the flow of the text a little better. For example if one person wrote most of the section they would approve additions to that section.

Take someone like me, I might be able to write something for the FAQ but how I would say it may not make the most sense. Where as someone else could say what I wanted to say in less words and more meaning.

There are people out there with much knowledge but afraid to speak out from fear of being ridiculed. This will allow people out there that know what they are talking about but have trouble putting it into words / sentences to make a contribution.

[LCHIEN]

Loring Answers:

I have been listening with mixed emotions.

I remember how we discussed, and set up committees and special forums for generating the faq by committee and nothing happened for months. By then I had been reading the forum quite closely for some time and felt I knew some of the answers well, and felt I could also provide a relatively unbiased summary of some of the issues that were not out and out factual. I feel I succeeded in summarizing a lot of facts where facts were available and where there was not an answer that could be answered in black and white I provided what I felt was a balanced summary of the advantages and disadvantages of each possible answer.

I feel its pretty darn good as it is and have acertain amount of pride in it. Sam calls it "Excellent".

My concerns are

1. Committees don’t work well – I think we proved that with the months of inaction. People are always willing to take a shot at what someone else has written but won’t come up with original material of their own.
2. Everyone is offering to expropriate what up until now is a personal legacy. It’s as if Shakespeare’s audience said, "Yeah that’s a nice piece of writing, Bill, but if we had a committee we could make it better for you". No one’s asking how I feel or if I’m willing to have other people edit my work. I don’t think Sam’s choice of #2 or #3 can be taken ethically without my consent.
3. I have given not only editorial balance to the topics, but also given the work a complete and uniform feel. I have also balanced the amount of material devoted to topics consistent with the importance/complexity. I have carefully edited the spelling and grammar. I feel that if given over as public work then all control of these is lost.
4. Very few people have offered any constructive criticism over the last 2-1/2 years about the content. I think virtually none in the last two years. It either must be very good or the people who know the answers better don’t read it. Why will that change if we make it a Wiki?

I can’t decide if I’m too conceited/prideful to give it away or I really think it won’t work.

On the other hand it may be a dead issue. If the BT3100/Sears 21829 is the last of the BT3 series then the existing FAQ requires very few additions from here on out, anyway. If we want to prove how group editing can work, maybe we should undertake to answer the other F.A. questions out there – like Clamps, Routers, Dust Collectors, What Tools should I buy. Yeah, I know Jeff Schronce has been working on a Clamp FAQ but it’s not published yet.

OK, So I've had my ISP collapse on me and I've been procrastinating on setting up a new web space. I partly wanted to see what demand there was.

Anyone PM'ing me can receive an e-mailed copy of this or the other stuff. So far the Neutral vane template PDF is outstripping the FAQ by at least 5 to 1.

[LCHIEN]

As much as I like #3 I have to mention to those that were not here that in the early days a FAQ committee was formed and after considerable time Loring took it upon himself to finalize what became his creation. We on the committee gave input but with out Lorings gallant efforts I'm thinking it would still be bound up in committee. So i ask "What say Loring?"

....

Thanks, Mark, I read your comments after I posted my reply. Actually I recall there was no committee input after months, I think I suggested a list of representative questions as a starting point.
I created 90% of the content from recollections and research and paraphrased a few people with credits given.

[radhak]

maybe we should undertake to answer the other F.A. questions out there – like Clamps, Routers, Dust Collectors, What Tools should I buy.

I think that's the way we should go : create a wiki for a general FAQ that has categories like these suggested (which would obviously grow). People should be free to post their material into the wiki, if they are comfortable relinquishing control over content. I would be happy to see, as an example, some past posts from niki there, but it would have to start with niki posting it himself to the wiki to 'seed' it, so to speak.

On the other hand, if the original owner is not comfortable with the wiki, we would always have the 'search' function for earlier posts or (as with Loring), a PM to request for the original document.