Re: New forum that is more-or-less replacing Go Discussions
Robert Jasiek
(dot) com> wrote:
>http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum
What is the intention of having this webpage?
Ben Finney
> What is the intention of having this webpage?
Indeed. Why not send these people to the existing, and distributed,
rec.games.go forum?
--
\ “Patience, n. A minor form of despair, disguised as a virtue.” |
`\ —Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_, 1906 |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Nick Wedd
<jas...@snafu.de> writes
To replace http://www.godiscussions.com/, which has often been broken
recently, and this newsgroup, which has many fewer posters than
formerly.
Nick
--
Nick Wedd ni...@maproom.co.uk
brent
> http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum
>
> --
>
> Kirkville --http://www.mcelhearn.com
> Writings about more than just Macs
It seems that after 15 years or so the whining wino has started his
own saloon?
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
After its move to a new server, godiscussions has only two problems I
have noticed: a) occasional redirection to a different URL, b) no new
registrations. Does this justify a different webpage? Can neither be
fixed? Or are there more recent bugs I have not noticed yet?
Poney Carpenter
posting it on RGG.
GD basically died at the end of last week. It was completely down for
about 3 days, then since it came back up, most attempts to post lead
to database errors, and the few posts that make it through don't get
indexes or updated in the thread summaries, so you have to wander
through the threads to see if there are any new posts. It is almost
completely useless at this point. My understanding is that no one has
heard from Don about when or even if he will be fixing GD.
In the mean time, activity has started up pretty fast over at
Lifein19x19 (L19). Lots of GD users are there, folks who wanted to
register at GD but couldn't, lots of features implemented that people
wanted on GD, new forum organization that makes more sense, etc. I'm
not sure what will happen if GD eventually gets repaired again, but I
suspect the majority of the activity may stay at L19 even if that
happens. It will be a shame to lose the history, but the outlook over
at L19 looks much better at the moment.
brent
Shoot, the fog of time may have me a bit confused. Keith , Kirk,
whatever.
Michael Alford
:)
Ben Finney
> In message <mrnus5lp7idjb2ia1...@4ax.com>, Robert Jasiek
> <jas...@snafu.de> writes
> >What is the intention of having this webpage?
>
> To replace http://www.godiscussions.com/, which has often been broken
> recently, and this newsgroup, which has many fewer posters than
> formerly.
Since “replace” presumably entails “encourage existing users to
migrate”, why not encourage those users to migrate to this newsgroup?
--
\ “He who allows oppression, shares the crime.” —Erasmus Darwin, |
`\ grandfather of Charles Darwin |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Poney Carpenter
wrote:
>
> Since “replace” presumably entails “encourage existing users to
> migrate”, why not encourage those users to migrate to this newsgroup?
>
When godiscussions.com first came around, I was very skeptical that it
was a good idea. Now I'm pretty sold on it. Even though the original
site is practically dead, and a new (unaffiliated) one is just
starting up at the www.lifein19x19.com forums (L19 for short), I have
to say, I think it's a better place to discuss go-related topics than
here.
There is basically no spam. There are lots of different forums for
different types of discussions/threads, which makes it easier to find
what I'm interested in. There are cool features like embedded SGF
viewers. Stuff like that.
I may stop back in here from time to time, but I think I'd rather hang
out on L19, and from the quantity of go-related posts (dozens or even
hundreds per day there versus at most a few a day here), there are
lots of other folks who seem to think the same way.
So personally, I would suggest folks that want to discuss go head to
L19 instead of here.
Robert Jasiek
<poney.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
>There are lots of different forums for
>different types of discussions/threads, which makes it easier to find
>what I'm interested in.
I consider that a great disadvantage because the structure into forums
is not useful. In practice I have to check several forums to see if
something of an interesting topic might be there. E.g., a topic that
affects both amateur and professional activity I can post in neither
forum because half of its scope would be lost; so I need to put or
find such a topic also in General Go Chat or possibly in
Announcements, unless it happens to be in Study Group or Game
Analysis...
(Other advantages or disadvantages of web forums were discussed some
years ago.)
Robert Jasiek
(dot) com> wrote:
>Or you just click View Unread Posts
I do not see this. I see Mark Forum Read but only if I login. Already
this is inconvenient if I want to read only. Compared to newsgroups
with the newsreader's automatic(!) management it is way too nasty for
my taste.
[forum categories]
>You seemed to have posted often enough on GD, so apparently it didn't
>bother you very much.
Wrong. It does bother me very much each time. It is just not terrible
enough to prevent me posting on GD.
Why are there fixed forum topics anyway? It would be much nicer if
each new thread were started with a forum category of one's choice
incl. new ones, which might be filed under Miscellaneous as long as
there are too few threads per category.
Currently fixed forums are a necessity of the newsnet but not of
webpages.
Poney Carpenter
> Why are there fixed forum topics anyway? It would be much nicer if
> each new thread were started with a forum category of one's choice
> incl. new ones, which might be filed under Miscellaneous as long as
> there are too few threads per category.
>
Well, while I see your point, Robert, I (apparently most other folks
discussing go online, evidenced by them posting on GD and L19), prefer
the multiple fixed forums approach.
You do have to log in to L19 to get a lot of the features, but there
is an option to stay logged in, so it's not too hard.
I love reading your posts, Robert, and will try to stop here
occasionally to read them, but I'll miss having you over at L19.
brent
> info. I don't know what you mean about "whining wino"....
>
> Yea, if you're confused, better not to insult people blindly.
What do you mean? This is rec.games.go.
> Kirk
> --
>
> Kirkville --http://www.mcelhearn.com
> Writings about more than just Macs- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Robert Jasiek
<poney.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
>there is an option to stay logged in
If one does not use per-session user data in one's browser, which has
other advantages.
alex
> http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum
>
> Kirk
> --
>
> Kirkville --http://www.mcelhearn.com
> Writings about more than just Macs
First of all, know that I've barely visited GD, so my observations
might not be totally correct.
(And the title of L19 is already wrong, as go is more than 19x19.)
However, I've had the same type of discussion with former club
members. And Robert, I'd like you to provide me a link to those
previous forum discussions, because searching RGG - via Google Groups
- is no sinecure (hmmm... there you have an inconvience).
1. Forums just scatter subjects into many smaller "focused, on topic"
mailing lists. You just divide the problem into several smaller
problems (but that's not what D&C [1] is meant).
2. But here's a much more fundamental issue: as "technology"
progresses, new ways are found to bring people together (i.e. new
features in fora), but at the same time those very fora risk to
disappear much faster because yet newer technologies appear on the
horizon. The "accumulated knowledge" slowly transforms into _fleeting
knowledge_ (i.e. knowledge that disappears whenever for any reason a
medium ceases to exist because one prefers to "start off from a fresh
base"). Because of the increasing speed of technological revolution,
as long as that revolution does not take in the existing knowledge
that is present in "old" media (eg RGG, GD), the level of fleeting
knowledge will decrease (because before one knows, the "new" media is
once more obsolete).
Those media become rapidly obsolete because priority is given to high
tech (that is much more prone to cyber atacks), maybe for implementers
to show off, maybe because cheap solutions are decided over long-term
durable options. A big problem of free fora is - who is going to pay
for them? No money, no server maintenance.
Maybe those really interested should make the effort to find primitive
channels such as RGG. As a side note, one can wonder how long such
newsgroup archives will persist - again: who pays for the archives?
But it seems to me that from a future-proof POV a flat text archive
must be cheaper and easier to maintain than feature-rich fora that
e.g. require their MySQL database and PHP implementations. According
to Nick Wedd (see message 4) there would be less posters; and the
amount of spam hasn't decreased; yet, are those reasons to replace RGG
with a flashy site?
IMO fora are good for temporary stuff such as selling things,
organising meetings (calendars), any information that has no long-term
value.
My conclusion: keep it simple and stupid: choose for future and
content rather than flashy <sic> surface. [2]
/En passant/ I notice that 'Kirk' flagged his message (and apparently
his other messages too) for 'Do Not Archive', which will make his
message(s) disappear into the big black bucket soon. A way to make
life more difficult on RGG? Not surprising for someone who is
promoting a forum.
-alex-
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_and_conquer_algorithm
[2] Admittedly, this sounds so much like someone clinging to old stuff
rather than embracing new stuff...
Ted S.
> According
> to Nick Wedd (see message 4)
What "message 4"?
Not all of us are using Giggle Gropes and have the messages numbered the
same way you do.
--
Ted S.
fedya at hughes dot net
Now blogging at http://justacineast.blogspot.com
Joel Olson
news:6593be06-f100-4fb0...@k36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
-alex-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I read you loud and clear. Our club transitioned from Yahoo Groups to
Google Groups (which had rss, whatever that is), leaving behind some
images, as well as a 2-year body of messages. Then, a few months later,
in conjunction with our new webpage, we had to go to a forum. We now
get e-mails announcing a new post, and we can go and log in and shift to
the proper page and read it; where before the e-mail was the message.
And the notifications don't always work. But the forums do a sort of subset
of html, and they've been working on getting diagrams for a year now ...
richard
I also find it difficult to find topics in GD or its successor but for me, the main issue is the presence of moderators.
Moderators can censor the discussion - often just as it becomes interesting.
The worst situation is when you have a type who I would liken to a politician or public "servant". Opinionated and believing
that they have a god given right to decide how other people should behave - they may find rgg less than palatable.
Joel Olson
news:4bd4546e$0$2951$ba4a...@reader.news.orange.fr...
> On 2010-04-24 18:40:02 +0200, "Joel Olson" <joel....@cox.net> said:
>
>>
>> I read you loud and clear. Our club transitioned from Yahoo Groups to
>> Google Groups (which had rss, whatever that is), leaving behind some
>> images, as well as a 2-year body of messages. Then, a few months later,
>> in conjunction with our new webpage, we had to go to a forum. We now
>> get e-mails announcing a new post, and we can go and log in and shift to
>> the proper page and read it; where before the e-mail was the message.
>> And the notifications don't always work. But the forums do a sort of
>> subset
>> of html, and they've been working on getting diagrams for a year now ...
>
> keep it up-to-date because those are technologies that will last for quite
> some time (as they drive most web sites).
>
> Kirk
> --
>
> Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
> Writings about more than just Macs
>
I've no part in running it - all I know is that its a popular freebie, and
that
the forum end looks a lot like the 19X19 site, but less well organized. Last
I heard, they were trying to figure out how to do diagrams, but that was
some
time ago.
Joel Olson
news:4k2Bn.37925$Yk1....@newsfe01.ams2...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hear hear.
The lack of censorship is to me a very strong argument for continuing rgg.
And by extension, USENET.
brent
Big Duck likes moderated forums, but from what I heard, when Big Duck
tried to sign up for GD he was banned.... even before getting on the
site.
Michael Alford
Second that!
Nick Wedd
<mullens-...@ntlworld.com> writes
>> rather than embracing new stuff...
>
>I also find it difficult to find topics in GD or its successor but for
>me, the main issue is the presence of moderators.
>Moderators can censor the discussion - often just as it becomes interesting.
>
>The worst situation is when you have a type who I would liken to a
>politician or public "servant". Opinionated and believing that they
>have a god given right to decide how other people should behave - they
>may find rgg less than palatable.
On the contrary. Such people, if they are rational, should welcome rgg,
as an outlet for the people and views that they ban from their own fora.
Their task is easier if they can say "you are allowed to say that, just
not here".
richard
:)
But not only are they impotent on rgg, the existence of rgg deprives them of people to ban and, for the megalomaniacs, the
ability to exercise their power. I'm sure that the politicians hate the existence of a free "wild west" internet where their
influence counts for nothing.
Coralling docile sheep may be pleasant to some but here they are likely to get bitten.
Michael Alford
lol :-)
Robert Jasiek
(dot) com> wrote:
>Was anyone ever banned from GD? No one's been banned from the new
>forum, AFAIK. Are you worried you'd be banned for some reason?
I do not know about censorship on GD but another web forum
(www.dgob.de) has had censorship as well as requests for
self-censorship. The limits of the human right to freedom of speech
were not scratched at all but a) webmaster's opinion or b) go
politician's opinion or influence. On GD, other users have expressed
their view that certain views should not be expressed in their
opinion. The most typical background reasons are related to sponsor
money and guesses(!) about why it might be or might have been reduced
while world economical or other reasons were not considered
sufficiently, IMO. Some years ago, also a few similar posts were made
on RGG but in vain and only on a very unspecific level; RGG cannot be
censored easily by means of arguments. This makes RGG (and every
unmoderated newsgroup) the by far best place for freedom of speech;
mere rumours do not survive facts and reasoning.
richard
> On 2010-04-28 12:06:45 +0200, Nick Wedd <ni...@maproom.co.uk> said:
>
>>> I also find it difficult to find topics in GD or its successor but
>>> for me, the main issue is the presence of moderators.
>>> Moderators can censor the discussion - often just as it becomes
>>> interesting.
>>>
>>> The worst situation is when you have a type who I would liken to a
>>> politician or public "servant". Opinionated and believing that they
>>> have a god given right to decide how other people should behave -
>>> they may find rgg less than palatable.
>>
>>
>> On the contrary. Such people, if they are rational, should welcome
>> rgg, as an outlet for the people and views that they ban from their
>> own fora. Their task is easier if they can say "you are allowed to say
>> that, just not here".
>
>
> AFAIK. Are you worried you'd be banned for some reason?
>
The discussion of cgoban-h was curtailed I believe on GD by a KGS admin. At least that's my understanding.
In effect everyone was banned from discussing the topic further.
On the other hand there were some sharp exchanges, in which I participated, concerning proposed EGC rule changes - but the
furore died a natural death.
In my opinion there was censorship on a well known national Go website possibly because it was felt that sponsorship money was
at stake. One might say that peace was bought at the price of truth, vitality and freedom of expression.
I could make the statement that one might find Tesuji and Anti-Suji of Go using p2p software. Someone hopeful of a good price
for the (out of print) physical book - might take exception to that. I suspect others here might also not like it (authors of
go books for example). Here there may follow a heated discussion of the topic. I don't know what would happed on GD if someone
asked "where can I get a copy of T&ATOG" and that suggestion was made. Perhaps the reply would be removed - though it would
hardly be a startling observation.
Robert Jasiek
(dot) com> wrote:
>Robert, if you're so uncomfortable posting on forum that are not
>"free", then don't.
Very uncomfortable is not the only criterion for me whether I post to
a particular forum or not.
Robert Jasiek
(dot) com> wrote:
>Then why make such a big deal about it?
Because advertising for comfortable instead of uncomfortable forum
behaviour is worth the effort.
Ben Finney
> Robert, if you're so uncomfortable posting on forum that are not
> "free", then don't.
Like Robert, I reject your implied dichotomy of “either use it or
don't”. One can also agitate for making it better.
--
\ “When [science] permits us to see the far side of some new |
`\ horizon, we remember those who prepared the way – seeing for |
_o__) them also.” —Carl Sagan, _Cosmos_, 1980 |
Ben Finney
Robert Jasiek
(dot) com> wrote:
>You're clearly in the minority; most everyone else, other than a
>handful of people here, are fine with forums. Sometimes you have to
>accept that things won't be the way you want.
I wonder. Do really most people like, e.g., the tiny message creation
editing field of typical forums?
Robert Jasiek
(dot) com> wrote:
> Compose your messages in another program then paste them.
Possible and also inconvenient.
>Or learn to say the same thing with fewer words.
This is not a suitable approach for technical, detailed discussion.
alex
> You're clearly in the minority; most everyone else, other than a
> handful of people here, are fine with forums. Sometimes you have to
> accept that things won't be the way you want.
Godwin's Law is lurking...
Joel Simpson
Greasemonkey and a script like the text area resize script may provide
a solution. http://lifehacker.com/238973/resize-any-firefox-text-area-with-textarea-resize-greasemonkey-script
After installing, ctrl+enter will expand any text areas on a web page.
If you don't want to install anything, there is also a bookmarklet
that will allow you to resize text areas as well.
http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/FormTextResizer/
Robert Jasiek
<joel.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Greasemonkey and a script like the text area resize script may provide
>a solution. http://lifehacker.com/238973/resize-any-firefox-text-area-with-textarea-resize-greasemonkey-script
>After installing, ctrl+enter will expand any text areas on a web page.
Doesn't this work for Firefox anyway? Here it does but with CTRL +
"+".
alex
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:01:17 +0200, Kirk McElhearn <kirkmc (at) mac
>
> (dot) com> wrote:
> >http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum
>
> What is the intention of having this webpage?
Interestingly kirkmc does not mention the page on Sensei's (while he
has made comments there):
rt
The current version of firefox has this built in - hold down the control key
and roll the mouse wheel (if your mouse has one).
Or are you thinking of something else?