News:

Want to get involved in developing SMF, then why not lend a hand on our github!

Main Menu

Management idea (Split from: The new Edit rule...)

Started by DenDen60, February 24, 2015, 03:56:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

DenDen60

I am not going to start a debate on if it is good or bad, but I will offer a solution based on a mix of knowledge management and usability that should answer the needs of every one.

General overview

As I look at SMF, I see 5 main categories

       
  • SMF2
  • SMF1
  • Themes
  • Mods
  • On-line manual
Problems

Each of these categories answers different user needs both, in terms of contents and the need to exchange on the content. Each of these categories also have a lot of content.

Solution

The way I see it, it might be the time to split them, where each of these categories would have its own instance of SMF powering it up. Since they are completely separated they could be configured to respond to the needs of the members at the time they need to access it. It would also permit to structure the knowledge in a new and a more effective way.

Just separating the content and configuring the content would be good enough, but to make sure that everything goes well for the user, it might be a good idea to create a small interface so that the process is kind of seamless for the user. (I have included three images of how the interface could be organized.)

Return on investment

Return on investment does not necessarily need to be financial. It can be associated with time, user experience, reputation etc. I think that going that route as a very good return on investment for SMF and its users.

Hope it helps.

PS Some members will realize that this is exactly what I am trying to accomplish with Citizens and Societies. This is true, but I think SMF situation requires the same type of solutions that Citizens and Societies require's.




Arantor

QuoteThe way I see it, it might be the time to split them, where each of these categories would have its own instance of SMF powering it up.

Dear $deity, [b[NO[/b].

Why are you so obsessed with this behaviour?

DenDen60

By the way I tried Dougiefresh split forum. It would be great to split the knowledge, but since it is the same member database, you could not create one sub-forum to have an active edit my message rule.

Burke ♞ Knight

Denis Pageau, what you outlined, is not needed here, or at many places.
Also, that has NO bearing on the edit rule, which this topic discusses.

As my friend said: NO on that idea.

DenDen60

Quote from: Arantor on February 24, 2015, 03:58:03 PM
QuoteThe way I see it, it might be the time to split them, where each of these categories would have its own instance of SMF powering it up.

Dear $deity, [b[NO.

Why are you so obsessed with this behaviour?
Arantor, I think I have the right to suggest this and of course you have the right to disagree, but I think it is important that we go outside the box to find solutions. Mine might not be accepted but it might give an idea to somebody else. 

Arantor

There's going outside the box, and there's trying to solve the problem by going to an entirely different planet to find it. That's how far outside the box you are.

This sort of 'suggestion' doesn't help anyone or anything and just invests a lot of time pontificating about things that are never going to happen, and circlejerking people around. It's not appreciated.

DenDen60

Quote from: Burke ♞ Knight on February 24, 2015, 04:03:12 PM
Also, that has NO bearing on the edit rule, which this topic discusses.

Of course it has. Since you use different instances, one of them could have the edit rule on.

Arantor

Except that we would turn the edit rule the SAME WAY on all of them.

DenDen60

Quote from: Arantor on February 24, 2015, 04:06:47 PM
Except that we would turn the edit rule the SAME WAY on all of them.

NO, Each instance would have it's own user database. Look at the images I have included.

Kindred

I will tell you right now.

***NO*** 

from both a project and an organizational perspective. NO!!


Don't argue.
don't try to justify anything.

You are just plain wrong and that will never happen.
Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Burke ♞ Knight

Normally, it is up to me to find fault and complain about what Kindred just said, but I cannot do so, so I'll have to just say:




Arantor

Quote from: Denis Pageau on February 24, 2015, 04:08:36 PM
Quote from: Arantor on February 24, 2015, 04:06:47 PM
Except that we would turn the edit rule the SAME WAY on all of them.

NO, Each instance would have it's own user database. Look at the images I have included.

Just because it would give us the power, you presume we would use it any differently to today. I know full well we would not.

Kindred

even if we were interested in doing what you suggest (and we are not)
additionally, looking at your graphics... that is an extremely POOR architecture/logic design that would use way more connections and resources than needed
Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Burke ♞ Knight

To whoever split this ridiculousness from my topic, many thanks. :)

Steve

I'm not sure ridiculing someone's idea is the way to go ... tell why it's not a good idea yes, but ridicule, no. Besides, one idea however bad, may generate a good one in someone else's mind. ;) jmo
DO NOT pm me for support!

DenDen60

Quote from: Kindred on February 25, 2015, 11:10:05 AM
that is an extremely POOR architecture/logic design that would use way more connections and resources than needed
It's a first draft, you can improve it if you want.  ;)

This being said, all the interface is, is a database and a set of links.

I go to my interface, I log in, I click on SMF2 and it brings me there by sending my usersame and password and I am loged IN. I am finish I logof and I am back at my interface. ( When I log of I could have an option that asks, if I want to be logged of my interface as well.)

Of course you need to create a few mods,  to make the process work, including the process by which the profile is first updated when you log in to one of the instances, but that's it. If I never connect to SMF1, the database will never be updated, I will never be part of SMF 1.

Anyway, like I always do, I share my ideas and if people like it good, if people don't like it good, and if can help people find another solution great.

I do think that knowledge management wise and usability wise, it would solve a few problems, and as I said, it just a first draft. we can improve on it.

Note: Please remember that I had this working on version 1.1, 7 years ago.

live627


Kindred

I don't care if you had it working... its a BAD design/architecture.

And, as I said. NO. it will never happen here.
Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Arantor

It solves a problem you think is there, though there isn't, and introduces many, many more.

Burke ♞ Knight

Also, to coin a phrase: What part of NO did you not understand?
That is NOT going to happen here, at a forum that stays as UNMODDED as can be, to show what SMF is like as IS.

DenDen60


Advertisement: