Sent by Jeremy Dunck on 14 December 2002 23:11
>From: Aaron Mehl [EMAIL-REMOVED]>
>Yes now I see it.
>I do have some more questions.
>The pages I have seen on the wiki often are just 2 or three peoples work.
Yes, so far, the CSS Wiki is not very widely used. I think that typically,
people don't "get" wikis, because they are not what people have come to
expect from the web. However, can still be a great collaborative tool.
>Is that what is supposed to be?? I started a thread and Eric suggested
>moving it to the wiki.
I personally think that only topics with lasting value to a wide audience
are good candidates for wiki'ing. Transient things like the progress of a
site check, are, to me, something that email and newsgroups are better
Again, I didn't follow the "golden rules" thread, but I suspect the
suggestion to host it on the wiki had more to do with the subject matter
(was it a general topic with lasting value?) than off-topic-ness.
>Because of the responses in the regular list am worred that moving it to
>the wiki would be the kiss of death???
Wiki is not a replacement for other forms of communication. It is just
another tool in the toolbox.
There is a great benefit to the notification feature that email offers, and
to the passive role that that affords the user. That is, when someone
receives an email, their attention is brought to it, and they can either
read or delete the email. Wiki requires the user to play an active role,
and that means that the user has to take the initiative to check the wiki.
Neither is a bad thing.. they are different ways of dealing with
communication, and they are both valuable approaches, depending on the
topic, and the timeliness, permanence, and volume of response desired on the
>Or maybe since this is the first I know about the wiki some advertisement
>plugging the wiki should be sent periodiclly to the diss. group.
I do think that it'd be useful to point to the wiki whenever there is a
topic being covered which has useful information on the wiki, for two
reasons: that it raises the awareness of the wiki, and that it causes the
wiki to be a user-defined FAQ.
>I so think that the wiki is a better format for that particular thread but
>since it will affect how I create sites/pages I would like it to continue.
Again, I am not sure about the particular thread, but certainly, some
threads -would- be better served by using the Wiki.
One idea I've been toying with would be the ability to signup for
notification when a particular page on the wiki changes, or even when a page
within a category is changed.
It'd significantly change the behaviour of the wiki, and since I'm not
familiar with the code, it wouldn't be trivial for me to do... not to
mention that it's not my server I'd be putting potentially high volume email
Also, there's the fact that passive users are somewhat un-wiki, and some
people seeking Wiki-zen might argue that people that do not seek the wiki
are not worth wiki contributors. YMMV.
I'd be interested in feedback from the email list on whether a subscription
system like that would be useful, and whether people think it would harm the
nature of the Wiki.
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.