I generally try to avoid critiquing the way things are done around
here. The people who do keep this place going are volunteering their time,
so I'm all for giving them free reign to run it as they please. Privately,
I've expressed incredulity about how inefficient the old system was... but
it wasn't my time being wasted. Since this is a major overhaul, I suppose
it would be a good time for me to speak up.
Isn't the entire notion of posting boxes to a list part of the old,
inefficient routine? The new site is a database. Incorporate a decent
search mechanism. If I want to see what new boxes have been posted in the
last week, then I should be able to easily search the database. If I only
want to see if new boxes have been planted in Maine, or some county of
Maine, in the last two days, I should be able to do that. If I want to try
to find all of Funhog's boxes, I should be able to pull up a list of them.
If I want to find all the boxes with the word Rose in the title, I should be
able to search for that. A proper search engine will filter out most of the
information that you aren't interested in. Why monitor lists? If people
really want to do that, send them to a seperate list, and they can monitor
that, or have the email sent directly to them in real time, so they can rush
out and be the first to stamp in.
The volume of posts to this list is already more than most of us can
keep up with, and will continue to increase with time. There is no need to
post up boxes. I don't think that we need to discourage it completely... as
Randy said, if you've just put out something dandy that you want to draw
attention to, then throw a message to the list directing people's attention
to the fact that it exists. It may or may not spark discussion... but that
is the point of this list, isn't it? There is no need to post up the entire
clue here, though.
Since Wes has just stated that he's isn't feeling buried, I don't feel
bad about asking that this be done. Why have a database that can't be
searched efficiently? It only solves one of the problems, that of
overworked webmasters manually posting up clues for the whole group. I'm
all for sending them to the newly created list for new postings, which I
will probably never use (unless we don't get a decent search engine for the
database).
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
This list, that list
5 messages in this thread |
Started on 2003-04-30
This list, that list
From: leger de maine (legerdemaine@hotmail.com) |
Date: 2003-04-30 22:29:24 UTC-04:00
Re: This list, that list
From: Drew Family (drewclan@aol.com) |
Date: 2003-05-01 04:06:20 UTC
>
> Isn't the entire notion of posting boxes to a list part of the
old,
> inefficient routine? The new site is a database. Incorporate a
decent
> search mechanism. If I want to see what new boxes have been posted
in the
> last week, then I should be able to easily search the database. If
I only
> want to see if new boxes have been planted in Maine,>>snip<<
Yup! That and about 100 other to-do's are on the list of things to
do. I think you'll really be happy with how this all turns out.
I still think yahoogroup announcements are functional for some
people. Everytime I'm at a gathering, I see more yahoogroup printouts
for clues than LbNA ones. Lots of folks use them.
Jay in CT
RE: [LbNA] This list, that list
From: John De Wolf (jdewolf@icrsurvey.com) |
Date: 2003-05-01 07:49:40 UTC-04:00
Isn't the entire notion of posting boxes to a list part of the old,
inefficient routine? The new site is a database. Incorporate a decent
search mechanism. If I want to see what new boxes have been posted in
the
last week, then I should be able to easily search the database. If I
only
want to see if new boxes have been planted in Maine, or some county of
Maine, in the last two days, I should be able to do that. If I want to
try
to find all of Funhog's boxes, I should be able to pull up a list of
them.
If I want to find all the boxes with the word Rose in the title, I
should be
able to search for that. A proper search engine will filter out most of
the
information that you aren't interested in. Why monitor lists? If
people
really want to do that, send them to a seperate list, and they can
monitor
that, or have the email sent directly to them in real time, so they can
rush
out and be the first to stamp in.
[JDW] AMEN!! What a joy to read. leger de main, I for one won't be
upset if you feel compelled to post more often ;-)
[JDW]
[JDW] John
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: This list, that list
From: cscm88 (cscm@toast.net) |
Date: 2003-05-01 13:38:28 UTC
> I still think yahoogroup announcements are functional for some
> people. Everytime I'm at a gathering, I see more yahoogroup
printouts
> for clues than LbNA ones. Lots of folks use them.
Yes. Personally, I keep all my clues for MA and RI in Word files. I
monitor the list(s), looking for posts about boxes in those states,
and append relevant information about found/missing boxes to the
appropriate clues. That way I'm as prepared as I can be when going
to look for boxes. It makes for fewer disappointments, but also
requires an anal retentive mind and a good chunk of time. :-)
I shudder to imagine the amount of time it would take to keep track
of all of CT's boxes!
CSCM
> people. Everytime I'm at a gathering, I see more yahoogroup
printouts
> for clues than LbNA ones. Lots of folks use them.
Yes. Personally, I keep all my clues for MA and RI in Word files. I
monitor the list(s), looking for posts about boxes in those states,
and append relevant information about found/missing boxes to the
appropriate clues. That way I'm as prepared as I can be when going
to look for boxes. It makes for fewer disappointments, but also
requires an anal retentive mind and a good chunk of time. :-)
I shudder to imagine the amount of time it would take to keep track
of all of CT's boxes!
CSCM
Re: This list, that list
From: SpringChick (letterbox@attbi.com) |
Date: 2003-05-01 22:20:54 UTC
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "leger de maine"
wrote:
> Isn't the entire notion of posting boxes to a list part of the
> old, inefficient routine?
Yes and no. Simply the fact that they are posted to a list is not
necessarily inefficient, particularly if the post is auto-generated.
People manually posting them to a list is inefficient.
> The new site is a database. Incorporate a decent search mechanism.
With the boxes now in a database, I agree it would be awesome to have
search functionality to drill right down to what you are looking for.
> Why monitor lists? If people really want to do that, send them
> to a seperate list, and they can monitor that, or have the email
> sent directly to them in real time, so they can rush out and be
> the first to stamp in.
There is convenience to having new box announcements pop into your e-
mail without having to even go to the web site to look for them...
this is especially convenient if you have e-mail access on a trip,
but not web access (i.e. on a PDA). For some it may be to rush out
and "be the first," but I don't think that is the reasoning for most.
I do however, agree box postings/announcements should go to a
separate list.
And sometimes you don't know what you don't know... Relying on
various searches and filters increases the chance of missing
something that is identified in an unusual way or incorrectly (either
on purpose or by accident). It also virtually eliminates the
serendipity of just happening to catch a post for a really cool clue
in a different state that you probably never would have even searched
on.
Perhaps there is the possibility of the best of both worlds in the
new world?
SpringChick
> Isn't the entire notion of posting boxes to a list part of the
> old, inefficient routine?
Yes and no. Simply the fact that they are posted to a list is not
necessarily inefficient, particularly if the post is auto-generated.
People manually posting them to a list is inefficient.
> The new site is a database. Incorporate a decent search mechanism.
With the boxes now in a database, I agree it would be awesome to have
search functionality to drill right down to what you are looking for.
> Why monitor lists? If people really want to do that, send them
> to a seperate list, and they can monitor that, or have the email
> sent directly to them in real time, so they can rush out and be
> the first to stamp in.
There is convenience to having new box announcements pop into your e-
mail without having to even go to the web site to look for them...
this is especially convenient if you have e-mail access on a trip,
but not web access (i.e. on a PDA). For some it may be to rush out
and "be the first," but I don't think that is the reasoning for most.
I do however, agree box postings/announcements should go to a
separate list.
And sometimes you don't know what you don't know... Relying on
various searches and filters increases the chance of missing
something that is identified in an unusual way or incorrectly (either
on purpose or by accident). It also virtually eliminates the
serendipity of just happening to catch a post for a really cool clue
in a different state that you probably never would have even searched
on.
Perhaps there is the possibility of the best of both worlds in the
new world?
SpringChick