|
|
|
|
bandycoot
May 25, 2004, 7:17 PM
Post #1 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 2028
|
Here's a suggestion for this website. What if there were a Frequently Asked Question section? This could contain all of the FAQs that beginners have that we all respond to with "do a search." For example; Which way should carabiners be oriented on a quickdraw, same direction or opposing? What type of rope should I get? I know that there are more annoying topics than these, but for some reason I'm blanking on any UBER repetitive topics. Links to these already existing threads could be put under each topic. It could look like this:
Quickdraw carabiner orientation questions:
(Insert link for forum A discussing this topic)
(Insert link for forum B discussing this topic)
What type of rope should I get?
(Insert link A)
(Insert link B)
That way, we can just tell people, "check out the FAQs section of the web site," instead of "do a search," since that almost never works. Only the "good" discussions could be linked, thus alleviating the question askers of scrolling through a pissing contest or flame war. As mods see certain repetetive topics come up where the regulars say "do a search" they could be added to the FAQs.
I'm ignerrent about anything to do with web sites so I don't know how hard this would be to set up, but thought I would make the suggestion!
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
Anonymous Poster
May 25, 2004, 7:32 PM
Post #2 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2006
Posts: 0
|
We already have a FAQ system, but traditionally we've limited it to website questions rather than climbing questions. We are going to be working a lot on this section over the next few weeks/months, so I'll look into this possibility. Good suggestion.
Trevor
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 25, 2004, 10:10 PM
Post #3 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
I've made the suggestion 10 times, and it just gets ignored.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
bandycoot
May 25, 2004, 10:41 PM
Post #4 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 2028
|
There could be two sections of the FAQs. One could be web site related, and one of them climbing related. (We'll see if the 11th suggestion gets attention). :)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 25, 2004, 11:53 PM
Post #5 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: There could be two sections of the FAQs. One could be web site related, and one of them climbing related. (We'll see if the 11th suggestion gets attention). :)
yeah, I suggested a specific climbing FAQ a la tradgirl.com
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
Anonymous Poster
May 26, 2004, 12:08 AM
Post #6 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2006
Posts: 0
|
In reply to: I've made the suggestion 10 times, and it just gets ignored. -Jay
Trevor
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
May 26, 2004, 12:27 AM
Post #7 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
In reply to: We've never had a tool to edit these FAQs. Now we do. Did I just hear you sign up to start writing these? Trevor
What is this tool you speak of?
However, regardless of the tools used to create said FAQs, people will still ignore them and post topics. I don't know why this happens, but it does. Even in forums with a "STICKY ALL PEOPLE READ ME FIRST!!" at the top, people still don't read it. It boggles my mind. :cry:
|
|
|
|
|
katydid
May 26, 2004, 2:03 PM
Post #8 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 3212
|
Being one of the FAQ re-writers, I agree that a climbing-related FAQ would be useful. But since the site FAQ that currently exists is woefully out of date, we need to get this re-written first. It already exists, but needs rather big help. It's going to take some doing.
Once the FIRST project is done, I think it's time to look into doing the climbing-related FAQ.
If we try to tackle too much at once, we'll end up with either a) sloppy work, which doesn't help anyone or b) projects that last forever because we're trying to do so much, which also doesn't help anyone.
We're not blowing anyone off. We just happen to have day jobs and school and junk like that to contend with (and sometimes even -- gasp -- climbing), so we need to divide projects into manageable units.
k.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 26, 2004, 5:00 PM
Post #9 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: I've made the suggestion 10 times, and it just gets ignored. -Jay We've never had a tool to edit these FAQs. Now we do. Did I just hear you sign up to start writing these? Trevor
I offered to do so a long time ago. Back before...you know.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 26, 2004, 5:10 PM
Post #10 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Being one of the FAQ re-writers, I agree that a climbing-related FAQ would be useful. But since the site FAQ that currently exists is woefully out of date, we need to get this re-written first. It already exists, but needs rather big help. It's going to take some doing. Once the FIRST project is done, I think it's time to look into doing the climbing-related FAQ.
Katy, these projects have nothing in common except their acronym. They're independent projects that can be worked on simultaneously. Find someone willing to act as the Climbing (not "Climbing-related") FAQ editor. That person can then write an outline of the FAQ, and delegate the compiling of major sections to individuals with expertise in those subjects. These experts are not, for the most part, moderators or administrators, anyway, so development of the climbing FAQ should not need to take a back seat to updating the site FAQ.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
katydid
May 26, 2004, 5:14 PM
Post #11 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 3212
|
Hey, I'm not disagreeing with you, Jay. I'm just saying that people-power is at a premium, and that we need more people to be able to do both projects at once.
As to "climbing-related", I think you realize that I'm breaking it down in terms of versus "website-related". No need to split semantic hairs when we're both discussing the same thing.
Trevor can give you access to get the climbing FAQ started. Personally, I think you're a great resource to get this thing going, assuming your offer still stands.
k.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 26, 2004, 5:27 PM
Post #12 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: As to "climbing-related", I think you realize that I'm breaking it down in terms of versus "website-related". No need to split semantic hairs when we're both discussing the same thing.
The only reason I made the distinction is to emphasize the fact that they are entirely unrelated projects. If we think of them as 2 FAQS: one climbing-related and one site-related, then I think the distinction is less clear; like they are two related documents, or even two parts of the same document.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
Anonymous Poster
May 26, 2004, 5:35 PM
Post #13 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2006
Posts: 0
|
OK, let's do this. Jay, could you start working on an outline. One thing I need to know right off the bat is if you're going to need multiple levels of FAQ categories. I think you will. I will enhance the FAQ functionality to support multiple levels (chapters within chapters). If you could start off line, by creating this FAQ in Word or something, then we can put this into an Article, until we get FAQs using multiple categories.
Trevor
|
|
|
|
|
katydid
May 26, 2004, 5:36 PM
Post #14 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 3212
|
In reply to: In reply to: As to "climbing-related", I think you realize that I'm breaking it down in terms of versus "website-related". No need to split semantic hairs when we're both discussing the same thing. The only reason I made the distinction is to emphasize the fact that they are entirely unrelated projects. If we think of them as 2 FAQS: one climbing-related and one site-related, then I think the distinction is less clear; like they are two related documents, or even two parts of the same document. -Jay
Fair enough. I certainly have been known not to artickle-ate well at times. :)
k.
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
Anonymous Poster
May 26, 2004, 5:40 PM
Post #15 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2006
Posts: 0
|
Here is an article you can use.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/articles/index.php?id=167
Everyone can see this when it's approved, but only FAQs Editors can edit it. I'm adding Jay to that group now.
Let me know what else you need Jay. Who else is going to help him?
Trevor
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 26, 2004, 5:42 PM
Post #16 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: OK, let's do this. Jay, could you start working on an outline. One thing I need to know right off the bat is if you're going to need multiple levels of FAQ categories. I think you will. I will enhance the FAQ functionality to support multiple levels (chapters within chapters). If you could start off line, by creating this FAQ in Word or something, then we can put this into an Article, until we get FAQs using multiple categories. Trevor
Trevor, sorry if there was a misunderstanding, but chief FAQ editor is not a responsibility I can take on right now. I could possibly be a section editor, but I don't have the time to donate to head up the project. I think it's a safe bet, though, that the FAQ will require multiple levels.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
Anonymous Poster
May 26, 2004, 6:05 PM
Post #17 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2006
Posts: 0
|
I think this is the point katydid was trying to make. It's all good that we _need_ a FAQ, but the problem is finding someone willing and capable of leading this project.
What we're saying, is "let's take all of the information about rock climbing and put into a nice condense little FAQ system. Easier said than done. I will enhance the FAQs to support multiple levels (and searching). In the mean time, if someone wants to pick this up and run with it, the article is created.
Bottom line (like everyone organization in the world) is we need more people _doing_ and less people _asking_.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 26, 2004, 6:21 PM
Post #18 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I think this is the point katydid was trying to make. It's all good that we _need_ a FAQ, but the problem is finding someone willing and capable of leading this project. What we're saying, is "let's take all of the information about rock climbing and put into a nice condense little FAQ system. Easier said than done. I will enhance the FAQs to support multiple levels (and searching). In the mean time, if someone wants to pick this up and run with it, the article is created. Bottom line (like everyone organization in the world) is we need more people _doing_ and less people _asking_.
As we've previously discussed, the incentive for "doing" is unclear.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
tim
May 26, 2004, 6:29 PM
Post #19 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: In reply to: I think this is the point katydid was trying to make. It's all good that we _need_ a FAQ, but the problem is finding someone willing and capable of leading this project. What we're saying, is "let's take all of the information about rock climbing and put into a nice condense little FAQ system. Easier said than done. I will enhance the FAQs to support multiple levels (and searching). In the mean time, if someone wants to pick this up and run with it, the article is created. Bottom line (like everyone organization in the world) is we need more people _doing_ and less people _asking_. As we've previously discussed, the incentive for "doing" is unclear. -Jay
Heheh.. Well put :-)
Perhaps the relative importance of various projects could be 'clarified' so that people can decide how pure they want their motivations to be. You might (probably should) want to take this offline with Trevor to work it out instead of slugging things out in public. (as in, is this worth a biner/nut/sling/subscription/cam/rope... or nothing at all? I can't say, personally, but Trevor might. What you suggested at Josh has in fact become policy...)
I doubt that explicit values can be determined beforehand, but a range might be possible. How much any given project can be spiffed for is a function of revenue at any given time, but it is unlikely that anything will ever get 'paid out' at market rates, more of a 'hey thanks, this rules, look in the mail for (some item from your wish list)' kind of thing. But it is starting to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
May 26, 2004, 7:36 PM
Post #20 of 20
(2193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Having a FAQ for this whole "climbing" thing was something I wanted to do two years ago. However, I was never able to get the assistance needed in order to make it more manageable.
This can always be a "work in progress." It's somewhat clear what the main sections would consist of: Top Roping, Sport Climbing, Trad Climbing, Aid Climbing, Bouldering, Indoor Climbing, and Training. From there, it's feasible to enlist the help of others to break down those categories further.
This isn't a horribly complex task, however it's certainly not for one person to take on themselves. I'm certain there are rc.com members that would be willing to scan through each section's respective forum and pick out most frequently asked questions and them compile some answers from there. Perhaps the project should just be stickied in each forum with a request for help in getting it done. Offers for assistance can be sent to whomever is chosen as a "project leader" of sorts.
So, I see two people right now that are willing to work on this; myself and jt. That's two, and all we need is a few more. Yea. . .we'll see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
