Massive Site Change Coming

[Admin]

Hi All, initial planning work has commenced on a complete site remake. Currently we use the very old standard of a web site with a main menu and different sections hanging off that menu. Even the sections are standard like Forums, Media, News, Events etc which have been the tradition of web sites for many many years even though technologies have changed.

 

The standard concept of this sites forums have always focused on the Thread and Posts but we see other mediums in recent years that have challenged that concept. One user, whom I am very grateful for, sent me an idea that perhaps we could look at changing the focus from this to user centric instead. In other words:

 

From this:

 

Great idea and especially what I need at the moment, conceptual ideas, in the initial concept design phase of the new Recreational Flying. Currently I am at the stage of screen drawings and mapping the integration and connectivity between the two of a concept that can sort of use the above idea but is not based on it at all but rather be a part of its integration.

 

I can say that the change is a long way off as it requires extensive design, technologies search, planning, coding, testing and user acceptance all of which could take at least 6 months. I will also say that Recreational Flying .com as we know it today, and have known it for the last 11 years, will cease to exist in its current form however when it gets to user acceptance stage I know that you will really want to be on board and be a part of it.

 

But it is very early days so it is most important at this stage to get from you conceptual ideas such as the one above. Concepts that can be built into the infrastructure of the site, concepts that will add value to the user experience, a whole different way in which the site works and operates as a resource for everyone in the aviation community. Think outside the box, outside the square, all ideas are not wrong, every single one of them is right to a certain extent that could be built into the foundations of the site. Even what processes are good and bad in the current site like " A Likes System", "A System that tells me when a new entry is made", "A System where every new entry is checked first", " A System where our club can meet behind closed doors" etc etc etc, good and bad.

 

The many different overall concepts that we can picture in our mind and get them out here in this thread would be worth the world to the future of this site at its current development stage.

 

PLEASE!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

[Admin]

As an example of a "Concept", let's for the sake of a label call it the Team Concept. When a user registers (and current users), they have to select a "Team" such as "Jabiru Team" or "Foxbat Team" or "Sonex Team" etc. and in that team they have all discussions, features, resources specific to that team, a complete sub site just for that team. A user can join sub teams but the Team Leader can boot them out if they play up. Ok, a strange concept but still a concept that could be considered being built in to the foundation of the site. Imagine the Jabiru Team just being for Jabiru owners, pilots and guests of the Team Leader, we would get rid of a lot of rubbish that goes on here, yes as I said a strange concept that has both pros and cons but an ideas of any kind would be a great help at this early stage of design

 

 

[dsam]

Admin, as Sir Humphry Appleby might put it... "How courageous, Minsiter". When I recently retired from a well known Melbourne university I worked within a team that developed web based learning resources and have a personal appreciation of the amount of blood sweat and tears that goes into developing such a resource. It always took much longer to implement than you first thought, needing multiple iterations to meet the ill thought-out needs of end users who had no idea of the impact of their various "thought bubbles" & changes. Admittedly, web development tools have improved over the last 2-3 years since I was directly involved, but don't underestimate the need for early planning, paper-prototyping & design - well before any code crunching. It'll save you heaps of grief in the end IMHO.

 

No doubt you already know this better than I, but I just wanted you to know that I feel your pain ;-) My particular input in the development team was video and audio content, but it all had to integrate with the design & development people whom I had great respect for. Good luck with your planning! I hope it becomes a rewarding outcome, both for you and the rest of us as participants.

 

Cheers,

 

dsam

 

 

[dsam]

As an example of a "Concept", let's for the sake of a label call it the Team Concept. When a user registers (and current users), they have to select a "Team" such as "Jabiru Team" or "Foxbat Team" or "Sonex Team" etc. and in that team they have all discussions, features, resources specific to that team, a complete sub site just for that team. A user can join sub teams but the Team Leader can boot them out if they play up. Ok, a strange concept but still a concept that could be considered being built in to the foundation of the site. Imagine the Jabiru Team just being for Jabiru owners, pilots and guests of the Team Leader, we would get rid of a lot of rubbish that goes on here, yes as I said a strange concept that has both pros and cons but an ideas of any kind would be a great help at this early stage of design

Admin, I'm thinking of your Team Concept as a user, and suggest you consider cleaving the user experience on multiple factors. Not just by "Aircraft Type" but by "Team" parameters like Maintenance, Builder, Aviator, Instructor, Navigation, Regulation, ATC, Student, etc.

 

If a given user is isolated to an interface experience of only like-minded participants, there's not much opportunity for the cross-pollination of ideas from participants with a fresh take on issues, critical review of concepts, and accepted wisdom being thoughtfully & respectfully challenged. It is this "contest of ideas" that I value most highly from the interaction of a broad variety of participants. If the structure of your revisions supports or enhances such interactions - so much the better IMHO.

 

Perhaps it is impossible to eliminate trolls in such complex designs, but that's true in real life interactions as well. Happy designing :)

 

 

[facthunter]

It IS an aviation site Ian. Don't set the bar too high, ol mate. There are even pilots here, and you know what they are like. Nev

 

 

[rgmwa]

As an example of a "Concept", let's for the sake of a label call it the Team Concept. When a user registers (and current users), they have to select a "Team" such as "Jabiru Team" or "Foxbat Team" or "Sonex Team" etc. and in that team they have all discussions, features, resources specific to that team, a complete sub site just for that team. A user can join sub teams but the Team Leader can boot them out if they play up. Ok, a strange concept but still a concept that could be considered being built in to the foundation of the site. Imagine the Jabiru Team just being for Jabiru owners, pilots and guests of the Team Leader, we would get rid of a lot of rubbish that goes on here, yes as I said a strange concept that has both pros and cons but an ideas of any kind would be a great help at this early stage of design

I know that's just a concept example, but would a Jab engine in a Foxbat or a Rotax in a Jab airframe for example set you apart from the `pure' Jab Team members. What if you change aircraft, or don't have a Jab but are interested in what's going on in the Jab world. Would you then have to become a team associate rather than a full member? How would Team Captains be selected, could they be voted out? etc. etc. Can't help thinking that the site would become more complex and less transparent, but then I don't really understand what's possible in terms of what you've got in mind, and what the advantages of a new concept might be.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[bexrbetter]

The standard concept of this sites forums have always focused on the Thread and Posts but we see other mediums in recent years that have challenged that concept.

Is there some sample forums with this system in place we can take a look at Ian?

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

When a user registers (and current users), they have to select a "Team" such as "Jabiru Team" or "Foxbat Team" or "Sonex Team" etc.

Put me down for 'Team Grumpy Old Bugger' !!

Of course you'll also need a team for 'hasbeens' couldabeens' and 'wannabees' too!

 

In all seriousness sounds interesting.

 

 

[Admin]

That Team thing is just to show an example of "thought" and NOT possibly feasible and it is these "Thoughts" that I really want to get from everyone. For example that "Thought" whilst may not be practical does offer some element of a possible solution to every Joe Blow average adding their negative comments, one of the current site problems, when discussing for example the Jab engine so perhaps there could be some elements of that "Thought", twisted or bent in some way that could be extracted and incorporated as an "option" in the whole concept. BUT NOTE, this is ALL hypothetical which is why I said ALL concepts are correct and the more different concepts you guys can come up with will enable some elements of the concept being used in some way. I am working on the Big Picture concept stage at the moment putting all different elements together to see if they are feasible in the grand scheme of things so thanks for your comments

 

 

[Admin]

Is there some sample forums with this system in place we can take a look at Ian?

No Bex because the overall solution hasn't been defined yet, but it is different, which is why I am asking for concepts to put the jigsaw puzzle together with the corner and side pieces that I have already laid out and joined

 

 

[ExJourno]

Is there some sample forums with this system in place we can take a look at Ian?

Have you met Facebook?

 

 

[poteroo]

Imagine the Jabiru Team just being for Jabiru owners, pilots and guests of the Team Leader, we would get rid of a lot of rubbish that goes on here, yes as I said a strange concept that has both pros and cons but an ideas of any kind would be a great help at this early stage of design

Ian, I think this forum is really important for learning stuff about aviation. For that reason, the broader the range of knowledge that's presented - the better it will be for aviation. Therefore, you need an 'entry' for interested people to join each forum - and it need not be some already acquired possession such as knowledge or an aircraft, or a licence, certificate etc. The gatekeeper to each 'forum' should be keeping in mind that inclusiveness is probably more important than exclusion - even though that might allow some disruptive souls aboard. happy days,

 

 

[Admin]

Guys, that was JUST a concept and perhaps nothing to do with the final result

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

I see the forums a bit like a directory structure. We have established a directory structure and you post into one location. If I have a Jabiru with a radio problem, do I post about issues to the Jabiru forum or the radio forum? It could be that the radio issue is related to the aircraft......

 

With more modern systems you put files into a single location (which in effect is a relational database rather than a raw file system directory structure, and then use metadata about the file to allow people in the future to find it in a way that best suits them.

 

For example I might have 6 views of the posted data that Im interested in seeing at the moment, and I note that they aren't fixed in stone and can change as and if my circumstances do....

 

1) a view of all radio issues for jabiru aircraft (or more technically all posts that have a set of metadata where we have avionics, radio and jabiru ticked

 

2) a view of all posts where we have metadata jabiru and casa and engines

 

3) a view of all things RAAus related

 

4) a view of all things with metadata ticked as my last posting was set up, so I can see any responses to it

 

5) same for next previous post that had different metadata etc.....

 

Microsoft SharePoint is set up this way...but a lot of folk who use it cant think past the ancient single approach directory and hobble it by immediately creating a directory structure, which in the example above means a post has to go to radio or jabiru...a metadata approach has both aspects ticked and a view of jabiru will display it, as will a view of radio, presumably in both cases with lots of other associated (or maybe not related) posts....as you add more metadata tags to your view the amount of returned posts decreases as things are discarded because they don't have all the metadata tags your view calls for... an example,,,jabiru brings back heaps of results,,,I might only be interested in the J230 related posts, or posts about the J3300 engine with solid lifters amd thick finned heads....... (which in reality might be almost too targeted.)

 

BUT....at the end of the day is this change for changes sake? Is there something fundamentally broken? or is it just a case of building a better mousetrap......

 

The usual stumbling block with Metadata is coming up with an appropriate and all inclusive taxonomy....but in this case there is heaps of years of posting history here where I would have expected some automation tools could generate an appropriate taxonomy from historical posts.....rather than try from first principles

 

Andy

 

 

[dsam]

BUT....at the end of the day is this change for changes sake? Is there something fundamentally broken? or is it just a case of building a better mousetrap......The usual stumbling block with Metadata is coming up with an appropriate and all inclusive taxonomy....but in this case there is heaps of years of posting history here where I would have expected some automation tools could generate an appropriate taxonomy from historical posts.....rather than try from first principles

I agree Andy. You've set out a good description for the variety of ways content can be filtered & viewed/noticed - an enhanced interface beyond basic boolean search tools. One thing we must keep in mind though is the level of end-user capability, and the degree to which the user interface is intuitive enough for the basic user. What seems intuitive to one person is often seen as arcane to another.

 

Another trap for developers is trying to make one piece of software do too many things. Sometimes segregating clusters of functionality into separate apps is a better way to go (ie. horses for courses).

 

A good corporate example of this over-aggregation problem is iTunes. Is it a music player? CD ripper? RSS access to podcasts? Shop-front for software?, TV/movies? Address Book sync? Streaming internet radio? iTunes Uni learning content? Talking Books? PDF iBooks...etc. etc. In the end, its current user interface has suffered declining usability for this very reason. Most casual users are confused & lost. I'm a long term Apple user but they really should know better, in my opinion.

 

Ian, you are a brave man taking this on. Luckily you are both the developer/designer and the chief stakeholder, so whatever you say goes. That should help with your decision making in the end. The rest of us can just dream up ideas that make your task harder :-/

 

Cheers,

 

Dave (dsam)

 

 

[skeptic36]

BUT....at the end of the day is this change for changes sake? Is there something fundamentally broken? or is it just a case of building a better mousetrap......

Excellent question:popcorn:

 

 

[Admin]

It's those dreamed up ideas that I am after and very appreciative of. If someone comes up with an idea that may sound really out there and silly, there could be elements of it that could in fact be great or just turned slightly to make a huge benefit to users...time to dream, from dreams comes ideas, from ideas come reality

 

 

[Admin]

Excellent question:popcorn:

From email lists came forums, email lists weren't broken but imagine going back to email lists now given the great benefits this site provides over an email list. The brick mobile phone wasn't broken, it worked as a mobile phone, but could you go back to that now...majority of people that is

 

 

[dsam]

OK here's a dream (nightmare??). Think of a metaphor interface that is a "virtual library shelf". I discover a book on the shelf that says "Stalls". Out pops a view of links to multiple recent threads that involve contributions on this concept/problem. Related older links go to threads on airmanship, situational awareness, theory of flight, aerobatics etc. Much would depend on targeting specific & helpful content within threaded discussions using smart keyword searches in the back-end of the database. It could become unwieldy though..

 

Cheers,

 

Dave

 

 

[dsam]

Later on I could ask the "Librarian" to find me a book on stalls specific to low wing aircraft. Come back a day later and the Librarian has "built" me a book on this topic.

 

 

[Admin]

It would have to be user selected key words which poses a couple of problems. Why user selected, simply because as we can see spelling is a big issue in posts especially with mobile devices and big fingers. The challenge I can see is to create appropriate key words that a user could select from, not too many but enough to cover everything. The next challenge would be then selling to the community that they have to select key words every time they create a post. Any automated system to extract key words could be very error prone like just take the word Jabiru or Jabaru or jab or jabby etc

 

And all this if we stayed with a thread - post system

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Have you met Facebook?

Regardless of what you read about China there is actually only a couple of websites you can't get to here, Facebook is top of the list and the only one I can't even get through a proxy - so no, I haven't met Facebook and I'm not sure I'm actually upset about it either!

 

 

[ExJourno]

HAHA!!!!! Do not.... I REPEAT.. do NOT allow Facebook to charm you over. Just don't. The Chinese do not know how lucky they are!

 

The point was, however, which I would imagine most/many would have cottoned onto, is that joining groups to see only posts within those specific groups is pretty much a function similar to the groups of Facebook.

 

 

[dsam]

It would have to be user selected key words which poses a couple of problems. Why user selected, simply because as we can see spelling is a big issue in posts especially with mobile devices and big fingers. The challenge I can see is to create appropriate key words that a user could select from, not too many but enough to cover everything. The next challenge would be then selling to the community that they have to select key words every time they create a post. Any automated system to extract key words could be very error prone like just take the word Jabiru or Jabaru or jab or jabby etcAnd all this if we stayed with a thread - post system

Understood. "Post Reply" could trigger a search of their post and pop-up suggested (correctly spelled) keywords that the poster could tick yes/no to, prior to accepting submission.

 

Perhaps limiting the concept to a thread-post system of contributor content is too limited for your" jigsaw puzzle" so broader thinking might be in order... any other creative minds out there?

 

Cheers

 

Dave (dsam)

 

 

[Rolf]

Hi Ian

 

I think the site is excellent as it is. Working with computers every day I personally like it simple and easy as it is and thank you for your effort to provide us with this excellent source of information.

 

I personally like to be able to freely browse all topics that find my interest. I personally would not like information to be filtered.

 

Kind Regards Rolf