Regarding Loring's excellent FAQ...

[Black wallnut]

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.

That is exactly the point that I was trying to make and as always you have summarized it better!

[TheRic]

Loring:
I think you did an excellent job on the FAQ. There is no way I could improve on it, specially at this time since I'm very much a newbie when it comes to the bt3000/bt3100.

Being the intelligent person you are, I figured you have been watching this thread closely. I also figured that you and Sam talked a little about this thread BEFORE it was posted. In fact I even wondered if it was your idea to start with.


Everyone:
Not sure what Sam originally intended with this thread. "I" took it to be to expand the FAQ to include other woodworking items like, clamps, routers, miter saws, chisels, straight edges, etc. I never thought about changing the info on the BT3000/BT3100, not sure there is even much left to improve on, or add.

My thinking is along the lines of since Jeff is working on the clamps, any additions, or modification to the clamps section would got thru him to help keep a even flow in that section. This is of course Jeff wants that responsibility. If there are any writers among use, maybe they might be willing to help proof the text for grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. (I know anything "I" did would need to be proofed ).

[Tom Miller]

I think, for the time being, that Loring's FAQ should stand as is, and any wiki-ing should be saved for topics not already covered. If/when such wiki-ed material rises to the level of FAQ-ability, it could be turned over to Loring to add at his discretion.

In the meantime, we'll find out if wiki-ing is useful and/or fun. Perhaps for starters, we could assign "moderators" on a topic-by-topic basis.

Regards,
Tom

[ChrisD]

Mark makes a good point about preserving the integrity of the FAQ. I think equally important is the QUALITY of it, which I think Loring pointed out very well in his response. The quality - as well as the quantity and presentation - of the content is essentially why the document is so well acclaimed.

I'm not saying this because I think the quality will decline as soon as other hands start touching the document, although that possibility exists no matter how much you restrict access to it. I think the only way to effectively restrict access in this case is to elect/select members by name - as opposed to qualification by post count or length of membership or reputation - to an authoring group.

My personal opinion is that the expansion of the FAQ and the adoption of a method to maintain an expanded FAQ can begin outside of the "Loring FAQ". There should be no question as to the number of opportunities for creating additional FAQ's because "It's not just about the saw". Larry, for instance, has sowed the seeds for a router FAQ with his series of polls.

Just my $0.02. Absolutely no offense meant to anyone.

[crokett]

I think equally important is the QUALITY of it, which I think Loring pointed out very well in his response. The quality - as well as the quantity and presentation - of the content is essentially why the document is so well acclaimed.
.

Chris,

A wiki itself is inherently self-maintaining. With so many eyeballs looking at and editing it, I think the quality will still be there. I vote for the wiki.

[ChrisD]

Chris,

A wiki itself is inherently self-maintaining. With so many eyeballs looking at and editing it, I think the quality will still be there. I vote for the wiki.

Thanks, David. But I think it kinda goes back to Loring's Concern #4? Unless it truly is because it's so nearly perfect that no one's commenting on it.

[radhak]

Chris,

A wiki itself is inherently self-maintaining. With so many eyeballs looking at and editing it, I think the quality will still be there. I vote for the wiki.

I second it for exactly the same sentiments. Do I see a poll coming up ?

[Sam Conder]

I second it for exactly the same sentiments. Do I see a poll coming up ?

Nope. This one will just be a decision. I'm guessing about 99% Loring and 1% me. My 1% is whether or not I want to mess with installing the Wiki and vBulletin hook.

[radhak]

Nope. This one will just be a decision. I'm guessing about 99% Loring and 1% me. My 1% is whether or not I want to mess with installing the Wiki and vBulletin hook.

Sorry, I should clarify - I was only referring to a wiki for an faq for other stuff, as Loring had suggested. I believe proprietary content should remain with the authors and not be dragged into the wiki.

[LCHIEN]

I feel a decision coming on...
I can see the benefit of a wiki when you have contribuors flung far and wide, each being a specialist in their field.

However, some circumstances at BT3 Central negate some of this.
1) I would venture to guess perhaps half of the worlds "experts" on BT3 care and feeding are tuned into the BT3central forum and contribute.
2) As a long term and avid reader and BT3 saw user I have had access to this knowledge, and the Forum articles are a repository for it.
3) Will an outsider come in and contribute some information not already revealed in the last 3 years? News, perhaps, but not technical knowledge.

Therefore, I think that the BT3 FAQ will remain a one-man item, I have been updating it recently with the demise of the 3100 and will either post it on a new webspace or have Sam deposit it in the articles section where it can be linked. I will make a few copies of the original editable MS Word files available in case I get run over by a "pimp in a white Cadillac" as my co-worker used to say when discussing saving important documents.

I have NOT recently run down the links to see which, if any, links are broken.
Is there a program that does this automatically or is it a manual process?
If manual, does anyone want to help identiy broken links or suggest other links that might be added??

As for the other topics, in the spirit of experimentation maybe a wiki could be started. Despite its alleged self-governing nature, at least some administration is required. Besides that, you may ask why if not ideal for the BT3 FAQ, why it is suggested for the other topics?

Well partly because we don't have the market cornered on experts on routers. We do have a lot of knowledgeable members, but unlike the BT3 saw, we do not have a prepeonderance of say 1617 users or PC895 users or Triton users. The question is whether we can encapcsulate the present body of knowledge into a single document.

I've considered putting together a HF 2HP DC FAQ together but maybe I'll wait and see.

[TheRic]

....I've considered putting together a HF 2HP DC FAQ ....

Most excellent idea!! With your article(s) on it, and your posts I can see that!!

Loring can be the first new FAQ into BT3Central's Wiki!!!!

[crokett]

I wasn't thinking of the Wiki being limited to just Loring's FAQ. I was thinking it might take the place of the articles. Instead of having an articles section, have a Wiki. The articles have to be moved anyway, so why not just move them to a Wiki? Unless of course all the articles are already in the FAQ.

[Sam Conder]

I wasn't thinking of the Wiki being limited to just Loring's FAQ. I was thinking it might take the place of the articles. Instead of having an articles section, have a Wiki. The articles have to be moved anyway, so why not just move them to a Wiki? Unless of course all the articles are already in the FAQ.

Nope, I can't agree with that. An article is something an author has written and is their content. Even though I may be wrong, I don't want someone else editing my article. Now, if someone wants to write their own article on the same subject, by all means, have at it.

Now having a BT3 Wiki or a Woodworking Machinery Wiki or whatever, and having a collaborative effort to create a central source for information, I can dig that.

[LarryG]

Nope, I can't agree with that. An article is something an author has written and is their content.
{snip}
Now having a BT3 Wiki or a Woodworking Machinery Wiki or whatever, and having a collaborative effort to create a central source for information, I can dig that.

That's exactly what I assumed the wiki proposal to mean. Loring raised some excellent points yesterday, but I for one never thought there was any intent to turn his work into the beginnings of the wiki, with any and all given free reign to modify it in any way they saw fit.