New Ideas for the Site

Lurker said:
This thread is 0.01% off topic, violators will be banned and the thread locked. Any questions can be directed to, and ignored by, a moderator. Thank You!
Click to expand...

LOL, that's not what i meant guys!!!!! I was just referring to the main front page!!

100% agree about there fourms though. I saw them warn someone once because he mentioned amtrak on an MBTA to providence thread.
 
I guess you could say the people at railroad.net like the kind of leaders who can make the trains run on time...
 
Having developed websites for a number of small companies/non-profits I'll say that you do get what you pay for. If we are serious about a redesign then we should look at outside design help.

Also, depending on how big we want this to get, we should consider becoming an LLC and trying to bring in revenue via ads or something. Adding all these things to a website is easy on paper but more resources cost more money and time. Otherwise the site is going to look and feel half assed and I don't think anyone wants that.

But before we start putting pen to paper (so to speak) we need to decide on the direction of the site. What do we want to add? Briv, a long time ago you showed me a mock up of a front page which would have done many of the functions people have brought up in this thread. Is that the direction we want to go in or do we just want to supp up the forums in some way?
 
I was going to say, create a sticky thread in the New Development that has a list and link of all new development so that it will be easier to find. I tried but it's very tedious and I gave up lol
 
vanshnookenraggen said:
But before we start putting pen to paper (so to speak) we need to decide on the direction of the site...
Click to expand...

This is what we should be focusing on at this point. What do people want the site to be? Are people happy with it the way it is, or does it need to change? If so, change into what? Should we just add new features and update the look and feel, or do we want to make fundamental changes?
 
I'm fairly happy with it, to be honest. It would be lovely to have an up front summary of ongoing projects somewhere, maybe a permanent home for awards (which we have; it's just not really obvious or linked to anything) but neither of those require moving beyond the forum format, necessarily.

If it were to move in any direction I'd like to see it have more of an advocacy role. The awards alone could be a powerful tool if they attracted press (just issuing a press release might catch the attention of, say, R. Cambpell). The site could function as a thoughtful pro-development think tank that throws its weight around in letters to the BRA, media, etc. to counteract NIMBY proposals like the shadow law. A slicker homepage would certainly help, but these are largely efforts that would go beyond web design and largely only be archived here.
 
^ I like czsz's idea for the site.

I really think the forum should be the main focus, but I also want this place to have an area which makes it THE go to place for information about development and planning: no digging through discussions required, just straight up plans and photos/renders/maps. The forum should be a place to discuss, collaborate, and form our own improvements, then get out and speak up (or just let our posts be heard).
 
czsz said:
I'm fairly happy with it, to be honest. It would be lovely to have an up front summary of ongoing projects somewhere, maybe a permanent home for awards (which we have; it's just not really obvious or linked to anything) but neither of those require moving beyond the forum format, necessarily.

If it were to move in any direction I'd like to see it have more of an advocacy role. The awards alone could be a powerful tool if they attracted press (just issuing a press release might catch the attention of, say, R. Cambpell). The site could function as a thoughtful pro-development think tank that throws its weight around in letters to the BRA, media, etc. to counteract NIMBY proposals like the shadow law. A slicker homepage would certainly help, but these are largely efforts that would go beyond web design and largely only be archived here.
Click to expand...

I like this idea. It would have to be a collaborative effort. Are others interested in this as well? How would we proceed?
 
One way to do it would be Wikipedia-style. Someone would propose the text of a letter to the editor or a press release and others could offer modifications and amendments, all of which could be voted on. The results would be sent off (to media outlets, regulatory agencies, etc) and could simultaneously be posted in a blog or archive that's either on or linked to the ArchBoston front page.
 
We had a separate wiki for projects, which wasn't very urgent or engaging as this process (by virtue of its subject matter) would be. I'd propose this all be integrated into the forum so that it's up front and visible, like the voting for the ArchBoston awards.
 
Oh, oops! Guess I didn't see it in the original post. They actually used to be called "UrbanSTL," and I've used them as a reference here before, but they significantly redesigned their site to reflect their growing activism within the St. Louis development community.
 
I think the biggest fix for this site, although i have no idea how doable it is, would be to have the pertinent information/ an image or two of the project at the top of the thread you are reading. So, if you are reading and are suddenly curious to, say, how many parking spaces are included in a project the info is right there.
 
found5dollar said:
I think the biggest fix for this site, although i have no idea how doable it is, would be to have the pertinent information/ an image or two of the project at the top of the thread you are reading. So, if you are reading and are suddenly curious to, say, how many parking spaces are included in a project the info is right there.
Click to expand...

It's not really doable in the way that you might be imagining it, but what you could do is have a team of trusted members as moderators that could edit the the first post in each thread to list the critical info.

I think that is a great suggestion though. It's such a pain to dig through the endless pages of rambling (and the NPCs) to find the facts. Sometimes it leaves me wondering too.
 
found5dollar said:
I think the biggest fix for this site, although i have no idea how doable it is, would be to have the pertinent information/ an image or two of the project at the top of the thread you are reading. So, if you are reading and are suddenly curious to, say, how many parking spaces are included in a project the info is right there.
Click to expand...

On a site I frequent called slickdeals.net, after each original post there is a section called "Wiki Community Board." See here for an example. On Slickdeals the wiki board section is explained as: "This post can be edited by most users to provide up-to-date information about developments of this thread based on user responses, and user findings. Feel free to add, change or remove information shown here as it becomes available. This includes new coupons, rebates, ideas, thread summary, and similar items." I have no idea how to add something like that, but it seems like it could work here with some moderation perhaps. New Development information and a few photos could be updated over time by the community.
 
czsz said:
I guess you could say the people at railroad.net like the kind of leaders who can make the trains run on time...
Click to expand...

In half-defense of them things have gotten better since the site changed ownership a couple months ago and the totalitarian site admin from hell was replaced by a much lower-key guy. It's loosened up a tad site-wide...everywhere except the MBTA forum where that mod is still a problem. But at least the admins are no longer tag-teaming in the lectures about what naughty children we all are.


...


I'm going to shut up right now in case he lurks here. :rolleyes:
 
What are the levels of "membership"? I just noticed that someone with 90 posts is considered a "senior member". This hardly seems appropriate given that those who have posted more than 2,700 times are also "senior members".

I recommend a complete realignment of membership levels. Over 3,000 should be something like "Better than you member" or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top