New website - feedback and ideas

[SLR No.77]

Anthony, do you really need to go back and edit a historical post where the information may now be deemed to be incorrect?  Why not just post a new comment pointing out the error?

[anthonym]

deleted

Edited October 27, 2023 by 700newtons
(original poster requested that his subsequent edited/empty posts are removed)

[700newtons]

OK - we get the feedback! This and the other comments will be looked at a bit later once we have lived with the site for a bit.

Simon

[anthonym]

deleted

Edited October 27, 2023 by anthonym
deleted by me as ill advised

[OldAndrewE]

Would someone with admin rights have the ability to edit posts after the 7 day cut off?

[700newtons]

Hello Anthony,

Yes, not everything is going to be right for every individual on the new website, but the team have worked hard over the last months and discussed the various options and tried to implement what we we best. 

You'll appreciate that we are not going to make immediate changes on one person's view - we need to get an idea a range of feedback and consider the implications. It’s not set in stone.

There is a bit more depth to the point you raise. Yes, there are decent advantages for members to edit old text. However, some significant disadvantages too. For example, someone could render a useful thread meaningless with bad editing or simply a grudge. Some members might like to see how a discussion flows and adapts over the weeks, and it's stays accurate record of whats happened - personally I would prefer that, but I'm not wedded to it.

There is a balance here, and it needs more than one view.

OldAndrewE - yes, moderators/admins can change content on the site.

Simon

[OldAndrewE]

3 minutes ago, 700newtons said:

OldAndrewE - yes, moderators/admins can change content on the site.

Simon

So in the short term, until this is decided, if there is something incorrect or even dangerous (from a technical aspect only I suggest)  perhaps a request could be made for it to be corrected

[anthonym]

deleted

 

Edited October 27, 2023 by 700newtons
(original poster requested that his subsequent edited/empty posts are removed)

[Wrightpayne]

I use several car forums albeit they are free and most have a time limit for amending your posts and anything after this window needs to be changed by the moderators.

Its never bothered me.

In the case of fixing old links to make them useful again, which is an honourable and very helpful activity, you could be promoted to ‘moderator’ for period of time as another option.

 

Anyway, the point has been registered. I’m sure the deployment team need a well earned rest for a while - excellent work! 
 

Ian
 

 

 

[anthonym]

deleted

ok I'm advised this is an agressive rant so I will desist. 

Edited October 27, 2023 by anthonym

[SLR No.77]

Can I suggest the use of the forum is being confused with a blog?
 

[GulfSeven]

LOL look at the trail of destruction in this thread 

[Wrightpayne]

Lets not forget the valid point that has been raised. A feature of the new forum is that we cannot self amend our posts after 7 days.

This is a change for all of us that needs due consideration. The LT have this logged as something to review, which I trust them to do.

[anthonym]

The photos system is wonderful. 

[anthonym]

My considered missive about "editing":

 

1. **Regarding the Edit Function, Legislation, and Historical Concerns**:

   

While recent legislation has emphasised forum host responsibility, we must address historical concerns like altering club meeting minutes, which highlight the significance of maintaining record integrity. It's crucial to note that forum discussions and official minutes serve different objectives. Offering an edit function for a restricted time, such as six months, permits users to rectify immediate errors or clarify their statements without jeopardising the essence of their comments. This middle ground preserves the crux of the user's intention while upholding the platform's responsibility, thus striking a balance between user autonomy, platform responsibility, and addressing past experiences.

 

2. **Inaccurate Information, Complexity, and the Editing Trend**:

   

The diverse practices across forums illuminate the intricacies of the editing discussion. Even if instances of inaccurate information are rare, especially in technical opening posts, the capacity to correct or refine details remains essential for preserving conversation integrity. Continually creating new posts for minor adjustments fragments conversations and perplexes readers. A distinguishable "edited" timestamp guarantees transparency without breaking continuity. This approach considers the unique collaborative spirit of our community, focusing on the importance of cohesive discussions and how editing can refine clarity and the overall user experience.

 

3. **Usage of Forums for Reference Material Amidst Legal Shifts**:

 

Forums, especially ones as unique as Techtalk, can fulfil multiple roles, including acting as repositories for invaluable question/answer dialogues, potentially starting points for technical guidelines. Although other mediums like blogs and wikis have their own benefits, Techtalk's conversational approach offers a richness in context unmatched elsewhere. Given the singular nature of our cars, this platform's significance cannot be overstated. Current public law shifts point towards a more cautious stance on editing. Yet, an approach promoting transparent edit histories, similar to Facebook, may offer the ideal compromise between user functionality and prevailing legal concerns, but notwithstanding this we have the moderators and all users have ready access to the “report” button to attract moderator attention.

 

4. **Purpose of Forums, Evolution, and Past Experiences**:

 

With the digital communication era evolving, platforms should be responsive to users' evolving demands. Feedback, particularly the desire for editing functionalities, should drive software improvements. Our club, known for its distinctiveness and having an entry fee, should stand out from typical, freely accessible forums. Emphasising that while forums have historically been discussion platforms, they can and should adjust to users' changing needs. The collective memories from our shared history, like the "Dark Years", underscore the need for thoughtful, but not fearful decision-making. It's essential to evolve, but any modifications must respect personal time, be cost-effective, and remember our shared experiences.

 

[admin_JM]

14 hours ago, anthonym said:

My considered missive about "editing":

 

1. **Regarding the Edit Function, Legislation, and Historical Concerns**:

2. **Inaccurate Information, Complexity, and the Editing Trend**:

3. **Usage of Forums for Reference Material Amidst Legal Shifts**:

4. **Purpose of Forums, Evolution, and Past Experiences**:

 

Hi Anthony,

thanks for putting your thoughts down. As Simon mentioned, we've very much got this on our list of things to think about and discuss when we next meet as a team. 

John

[anthonym]

You are welcome. I await your group thinking results. In fact something else I explored recently was public access or not, no strong feelings, but here is my thinking about this subject should it be worthy of a thought:

If pressed I'd vote private because the internet does not have our best interests at heart, but it's a broad subject; anywhere here ye go:  

a t b Anthony 

THOUGHTS

Our club site allows public free access to read only content and we always have several times the number of logged in members reading as "guests" - granted a few will be members just not logged in, but since our computers automatically log us in these days I expect as I say only a few. Given as I say these days login is automatic via our browsers I am wondering whether allowing free access remains a wise (or best) idea or whether we are losing income (not to mention content which is becoming scarce) from owners who would otherwise sign up and simply do not join the club because they can get the content for free. Are you able to generate any considerations about this?

The question of whether to keep our club’s forum content publicly accessible or to restrict it to members only is I imagine significant. It involves considering the balance between the potential for community growth (but owners know we are here and now we have reconciled with CC ?)  and member engagement versus the opportunity for monetisation and exclusivity. Here are several considerations to contemplate with more or less relevance:

 

### In Favour of Public Access:

**1. Blatchat Growth:**

   - Public access can lead to a larger audience discovering the forum, which can increase club awareness and potentially lead to more members over time. That said we have brand awareness via ownership of the cars and it being an owners’ club

**2. SEO Benefits:**

   - Search engines can index public content, driving organic traffic to our site. This can be valuable for attracting new members who are searching for related content. Ditto above re owners’ club. And wasn't the yellow site indexed but not accessible? I forget now.

**3. Showcasing Value:**

   - Allowing non-members to view content showcases the value of the club. If they find the information helpful, they might be more inclined to join to contribute to discussions or access member-only benefits. “Lurkers” tend to be the vast majority and these do not need to pay to view. Things like our array of discounts have to be attractive as regards costs v benefits - and these can be made public while BC is not.

**4. Supporting the Mission:**

   - If part of the club's mission is to educate or support the broader community of enthusiasts, keeping content public aligns with this goal. But as far as i know we do not seek to educate or inform the broader community. If we do then that content can be made public alone.

**5. Sponsorship and Advertising:**

   - High traffic from guests could be attractive to sponsors or advertisers, which can be an additional revenue stream.  ok maybe, but our interested advertisers are already well aware of us so i think this is less interesting.

### In Favour of Restricting Access:

**1. Exclusive Content:**

   - Members might value the exclusivity, seeing their membership as granting them access to 'premium' content that isn't available to the general public. We used to suffer from "moles" but those days are long gone thank goodness.

**2. Encouraging Membership:**

   - If some of the most valuable content is behind a club subscription paywall, it can motivate owners to join the club to access it - and the discounts!!

**3. Protecting Member Contributions:**

   - Members might feel more comfortable sharing detailed experiences and information knowing it's not freely available to everyone (as in the internet crooks) - or more to the point that it is private and their leisure activities are not being publicised in this ever increasingly dangerous world.

**4. Quality of Engagement:**

   - A members-only forum may encourage more meaningful and focused discussions, as participants are more likely to be committed enthusiasts - well, it IS members only, but if more joined instead of "freeloading" that would be lovely.

**5. Revenue for Club Activities:**

   - Membership fees can fund club activities, website maintenance, and improve overall offerings of course - or at least keep them level for longer.

### Balancing Strategies:

**1. Tiered Access:**

   - Some content could remain public to entice new members, while more in-depth, technical, or premium content could be restricted to members only. Let them see techtalk opening posts but not the rest.

**2. Time-Limited Public Content:**

   - Content could be publicly available for a short time before becoming member-exclusive, giving a taste of the value the club offers. So the real chat starts after it goes private.

**3. Preview Content:**

   - Non-members could access a preview or summary of content, with full access requiring membership. Not entirely sure how this differs from tiered access.

**4. Member-Only Forums:**

   - While keeping some forums public, create special members-only forums that offer additional value. I have always long wanted a private area, but the received wisodm WAS it would lead to flame wars - and moles would publish on pistonheads etc. I like to think we have moved on since those days.

**5. Contribution-Based Access:**

   - Allow public read access, as now and somehow allow content inwards. This was tried I think with for sale; I forget why it was not ideal.

 

### Evaluating the Impact:

**1. Data Analysis:**

   - Review website analytics to see how much engagement is coming from non-members versus members. If guests are not converting into members, a change might be considered. 

**2. Member Feedback:**

   - Survey current members to understand how they would feel about changes and what they value most about their membership: often that's LF

**3. Financial Considerations:**

   - Consider the financial implications of both models. Would member subscriptions outweigh the potential revenue from ads aimed at a larger audience? I reckon so in our circumstances.

**4. Market Research:**

   - Look at what similar clubs or organisations do and the impact on their membership numbers and engagement.

**5. Trial Period:**

   - Implement changes on a trial basis, monitoring the impact on traffic, member sign-ups, and overall engagement before making a permanent change.

Each of these considerations comes with its own set of benefits and drawbacks, and the best choice will depend on the specific goals, culture, and financial needs of our club.

So that's up to the Team. Wonderful as it now is. Happy 7 days.

Edited October 31, 2023 by anthonym
typos

[SLR No.77]

Anthony, the small volunteer group that have delivered the new website have worked extremely hard over recent months and are now in need of a well deserved break, quite honestly for us non-techies it’s hard to fathom the number of hours of work that have gone into this.  

We’ve recently discussed finding an alternative to LoveAdmin that will integrate properly with the new site but agreed that the group involved need a break, it’s very clear getting to where we are has taken it’s toll and we’ve agreed to now hold off until next year. Small tweaks at this stage are viable, but anything more is an unrealistic expectation on the people involved.

Even keeping abreast with discussion takes time and I’d personally ask that we give the guys a complete break until they’re ready to start again.

Stu.

[anthonym]

it's just text Stu, no pressure. Put it on the agenda and leave it there until it floats to the top. I do understand how these things work (or not!), having spent most of last night fixing a German server that went down.

edit: it wasn't for discussion, it is a discussion for consideration if and when that may be desirable.

edit2: small tweaks? tick the 90 days editing box.

Ant

Edited October 31, 2023 by anthonym

[StevehS3]

What has been achieved is a vast improvement and a credit to those involved with it. Thank you again. We are fortunate that a group of members have dedicated so much of their ‘spare’ time for the betterment of the website and the club.

I have been wondering about the best way of searching the forum for information; I am usually looking for an answer to a technical query. Is this still best done via a search external to the website? Apologies if this has been covered before! 

Edited October 31, 2023 by StevehS3

[StevehS3]

One other question, is it possible to recover the previous message from the previous site? I only have new messages received after the changeover. Again, apologies if it has already been asked.

[700newtons]

Hello Steve,

The site search function seems to work. You can access it from top of the page or the 'activity' part of the menu.

 https://www.caterhamlotus7.club/search/

(You get a lot of search options.)

Regarding personal messages - I'm afraid that these were not transferred over. We might be able to recover something if you are in a tight spot.

Simon

 

[StevehS3]

Thank you Simon. I will give the search a go next time I am needing something. 

[GordonW]

Can we please have the Google search option back? It may be my lack of aptitude but I find the search function poor.

I've tried the "phrase" option as well as the 'word AND Word ' alternative which delivered a near 300,000 results featuring 'and' ???

[Jonathan Kay]

2 hours ago, GordonW said:

Can we please have the Google search option back? It may be my lack of aptitude but I find the search function poor.

My experience and decision, in the Search Facility discussion.

Jonathan