Theme-ing basics in Wordpress

[suhaw]

The first thing to do is choose a theme which resembles the visual
effect you seek to achieve. The newer WP versions have facilitated
this process by allowing you search from within the Admin module, then
previewing it before applying the theme you chose.

After that, you can customise the theme by clicking on the "Editor"
hyperlink in the left nav-bar. This will give you access to all the
php templates and stylesheets that control all the presentation
elements in the blog. You should be able to change almost anything
from there, including removing/re-arranging elements and fields,
changing colours, fonts, column-widths, etc.

[Yi Hao]

Hmm, So who are the people that will be interested to take up the role
of theming the site?

----
With Regards,
Yi Hao

[C David Rigby]

Thanks Suhaw. I actually played with theming a bit when you and I first
set up a Wordpress installation last year. It did seem to be pretty
straight forward and gui-driven. I did dig into the templates of Drupal
to create the theme for the SFDS 2010 site. The general principles are
sure to be the same.

I'm happy to take on the role of theming the site. It will be a couple
of days before I can really focus on it due to other pending
commitments. In the mean time we should go ahead and add content if
there are things people are itching to write.

Cheers
David

[Pipat Yi Hao]

Sorry. Was busy with something earlier on.

Will be contributing article soon.

Should there be some guidelines with regards to contribution to the site? I am worried that if all the contributions just go through without any form of moderation, it will turn into some really bad article.

Let me know your opinions!

With Regards,
Yi Hao

[C David Rigby]

On 02/26/2011 06:58 AM, Pipat Yi Hao wrote:
> Sorry. Was busy with something earlier on.
>
> Will be contributing article soon.
>
> Should there be some guidelines with regards to contribution to the site? I am worried that if all the contributions just go through without any form of moderation, it will turn into some really bad article.
>
> Let me know your opinions!
>
> With Regards,
> Yi Hao

Should we designate someone to be an editor? That person or those people
would read all articles before accepting for publication. Also could
edit and send back to poster for corrections.

I have mixed thoughts on this. Sure, we can improve post quality by
having an editor. But that also creates a barrier to publishing content.
Waiting for the editor, and the extra effort on the part of the writer,
increases the barrier to getting things published.

I think I would come down on the side of letting people post without
review, but we the admins must keep an eye on things and request
revision of, or removal of, articles that are poorly written.

Cheers
David

[Ho Yi Hao Pipat]

Should we do it the Open Source way?

We should have a centralized way to control the post not for the sake of
controlling but rather to ensure that quality of the post and the site
is up to standard.

So, I do agree that while having an editor is a hurdle for people to get
their post to the site, but doing so ensure quality. Much like in the
open source community where everyone can contribute but there is someone
to ensure that nothing funny gets through.

What are your opinion?
--
With Regards,
Yi Hao

yiha...@gmail.com

[suhaw koh]

I am an evolutionary kinda guy vs the creationists: I believe in letting things evolve naturally vs getting everything perfect within 7 days.

 

At this time, the challenge is building up the momentum and achieving some mass (not even close to critical) of content.  While I would like quality content, the focus should be on gathering more content.

 

That said, I am also a stickler for good spelling and grammer (bad habit from one of my earlier reincarnated lives).  So, if I do see articles that jar, I'll probably go in and correct it.

 

Imho, the author should be given the freedom to publish whatever he/she is comfortable with going to the public with.  However, if the author wishes another person to proof-read it first, he/she can put it in draft mode and send me an email.

 

Cheers.

 

 

 

suhaw

--
________________________
Koh Su Haw  许树浩
http://suhaw.comma.sg/

[C David Rigby]

On 02/27/2011 07:12 PM, suhaw koh wrote:
> I am an evolutionary kinda guy vs the creationists: I believe in letting
> things evolve naturally vs getting everything perfect within 7 days.
> At this time, the challenge is building up the momentum and achieving
> some mass (not even close to critical) of content. While I would like
> quality content, the focus should be on gathering more content.
> That said, I am also a stickler for good spelling and grammer (bad habit
> from one of my earlier reincarnated lives). So, if I do see articles
> that jar, I'll probably go in and correct it.
> Imho, the author should be given the freedom to publish whatever he/she
> is comfortable with going to the public with. However, if the author
> wishes another person to proof-read it first, he/she can put it in draft
> mode and send me an email.
> Cheers.
> suhaw
>
>

Well said! Thanks, Suhaw. Cheers, David

> On 27 February 2011 18:34, Ho Yi Hao Pipat <yiha...@gmail.com

> <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Should we do it the Open Source way?
>
> We should have a centralized way to control the post not for the sake of
> controlling but rather to ensure that quality of the post and the site
> is up to standard.
>
> So, I do agree that while having an editor is a hurdle for people to get
> their post to the site, but doing so ensure quality. Much like in the
> open source community where everyone can contribute but there is someone
> to ensure that nothing funny gets through.
>
> What are your opinion?
> --
> With Regards,
> Yi Hao
>

> yiha...@gmail.com <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com>

[Ho Yi Hao Pipat]

So the idea here is to let everyone who register upload their own
content? Or should we give publishing rights to a certain group of
people and others can still contribute but their content have to be
vetted by another member first. [New member?]

--
With Regards,
Yi Hao

yiha...@gmail.com

[suhaw koh]

Personally, until we encounter a real case of abuse, I am inclined to:

* automatically assign "Contributor" status to anybody who signs up: this will allow the user to write/contribute articles, but they will only be published after an Editor/Administrator approves it.

* automatically upgrade a "Contributor" to "Author" upon request.

* subject to your agreement, upgrade an "Author" to "Editor/Admin" if any two current "Editor/Admin" agrees to it.

 

That last point is simply my conservative side fighting for a say.  The idea is that Editors/Admins have the rights to wreck the whole blog and we should guard against the possibility of somebody who is out to create mischief.  As a general rule, if somebody has contributed a few times to the blog or the tusg mailing list and shown him/herself to be legit, I am fine with the upgrade.

 

Finally, remembering the Spiderman maxim that with power comes responsibility, I would expect anybody who is upgraded to Editor/Admin will share in the editorial/admin responsibilities of maintaining the blogsite.

 

Cheers.

 

 

 

suhaw

[C David Rigby]

On 02/28/2011 03:00 AM, suhaw koh wrote:
> Personally, until we encounter a real case of abuse, I am inclined to:
> * automatically assign "Contributor" status to anybody who signs up:
> this will allow the user to write/contribute articles, but they will
> only be published after an Editor/Administrator approves it.
> * automatically upgrade a "Contributor" to "Author" upon request.
> * subject to your agreement, upgrade an "Author" to "Editor/Admin" if
> any two current "Editor/Admin" agrees to it.
> That last point is simply my conservative side fighting for a say. The
> idea is that Editors/Admins have the rights to wreck the whole blog and
> we should guard against the possibility of somebody who is out to create
> mischief. As a general rule, if somebody has contributed a few times to
> the blog or the tusg mailing list and shown him/herself to be legit, I
> am fine with the upgrade.
> Finally, remembering the Spiderman maxim that with power comes
> responsibility, I would expect anybody who is upgraded to Editor/Admin
> will share in the editorial/admin responsibilities of maintaining the
> blogsite.
> Cheers.
> suhaw

This is OK, but I would not make the distinction between Contributor and
Author. My reasoning is that the people that would be
contributors/authors are probably already know to us. If not in person,
then from the TUSG mailing list. As well, my experience has been that
people that will actually contribute articles are few and far between.
Even when the TUSG site existed previously, there were only a few of us
that contributed to it regularly.

Yi Hao, does WordPress support the sort of work flow we are discussing?
I. e., is it possible to allow contributors to submit articles that are
not published until approved? I know how to do this w/ Drupal, and I
assume something similar should be possible w/ Wordpress, but I do not
know the details.

Cheers
David

> On 28 February 2011 15:39, Ho Yi Hao Pipat <yiha...@gmail.com

> <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> So the idea here is to let everyone who register upload their own
> content? Or should we give publishing rights to a certain group of
> people and others can still contribute but their content have to be
> vetted by another member first. [New member?]
>
> --
> With Regards,
> Yi Hao
>

> yiha...@gmail.com <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com>

> > > <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Should we do it the Open Source way?
> > >
> > > We should have a centralized way to control the post not for
> the sake of
> > > controlling but rather to ensure that quality of the post and
> the site
> > > is up to standard.
> > >
> > > So, I do agree that while having an editor is a hurdle for
> people to get
> > > their post to the site, but doing so ensure quality. Much like
> in the
> > > open source community where everyone can contribute but there
> is someone
> > > to ensure that nothing funny gets through.
> > >
> > > What are your opinion?
> > > --
> > > With Regards,
> > > Yi Hao
> > >
> > > yiha...@gmail.com <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com>

> <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com <mailto:yiha...@gmail.com>>

> > > Koh Su Haw 锟斤拷锟斤拷锟斤拷
> > > http://suhaw.comma.sg/
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> ________________________
> Koh Su Haw 锟斤拷锟斤拷锟斤拷
> http://suhaw.comma.sg/
>

[Ho Yi Hao Pipat]

Wordpress offers the following by default:

Administrator - Somebody who has access to all the administration
features
Editor - Somebody who can publish and manage posts and pages as well as
manage other users' posts, etc.
Author - Somebody who can publish and manage their own posts
Contributor - Somebody who can write and manage their posts but not
publish them
Subscriber - Somebody who can only manage their profile

So it fits what Suhaw wants.

Basically, we should limit the number of Administrator as the
Administrator role is one that can potentially cause the most trouble if
they create any mischief.

The role of the Editor pretty much does it all. They have the right to
edit and mange other people's post.

While an author allows one to publish and edit only his own post and
finally contributor are allow to make post but they are not posted until
the Editor or an Admin approves it.

So yeah, Wordpress pretty much have the infrastructure in place.

On a side note. My server host have just dropped me an email saying that
they are upgrading the hardware on the server that I am on. End user
will not be affected. However, I will proceed to do a daily backup at
0000 hrs everyday till the migration process is completed over the host
side.

--
With Regards,
Yi Hao

yiha...@gmail.com

> > > > Koh Su Haw 许树浩
> > > > http://suhaw.comma.sg/
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ________________________
> > Koh Su Haw 许树浩
> > http://suhaw.comma.sg/
> >
>

[C David Rigby]

On 02/28/2011 03:31 AM, Ho Yi Hao Pipat wrote:
> Wordpress offers the following by default:
>
> Administrator - Somebody who has access to all the administration
> features
> Editor - Somebody who can publish and manage posts and pages as well as
> manage other users' posts, etc.
> Author - Somebody who can publish and manage their own posts
> Contributor - Somebody who can write and manage their posts but not
> publish them
> Subscriber - Somebody who can only manage their profile
>
> So it fits what Suhaw wants.
>

Cool. Thanks for the info.

> Basically, we should limit the number of Administrator as the
> Administrator role is one that can potentially cause the most trouble if
> they create any mischief.
>
> The role of the Editor pretty much does it all. They have the right to
> edit and mange other people's post.
>
> While an author allows one to publish and edit only his own post and
> finally contributor are allow to make post but they are not posted until
> the Editor or an Admin approves it.
>
> So yeah, Wordpress pretty much have the infrastructure in place.
>
> On a side note. My server host have just dropped me an email saying that
> they are upgrading the hardware on the server that I am on. End user
> will not be affected. However, I will proceed to do a daily backup at
> 0000 hrs everyday till the migration process is completed over the host
> side.

Good plan!

Cheers
David

[suhaw koh]

As best as I can tell, there are 2 main differences between Admin and Editor:

* Admin can manage users, i.e. upgrade/remove

* Admin has control over the theme, layout etc while the Editor doesn't.

 

In short, Editors can wreck havoc on all content while Admins can also do the same to the layout while also locking us out.  Recently, I saw signs of a roll-back feature so that even if recalcitrant Editors were to do their worst, Admins can roll back to an earlier date.  The same comfort is not available for the malicious Admin because the other Admins' rights can be removed.  The only solution then would be to delete the blog and start again, unless Yi Hao has "ghosted"/"snap-shot" a version to fall back on.

 

While I agree with CDR that we can and should trust almost anybody who signs up, my concern here are with spammers and other bot-like behaviours.  If we were to grant Author rights to anybody (any bot that can overcome the simple CAPTCHA), it would be a simple step then to spamalot.

 

Cheers.

 

 

suhaw

[C David Rigby]

On 02/28/2011 03:53 AM, suhaw koh wrote:
> As best as I can tell, there are 2 main differences between Admin and
> Editor:
> * Admin can manage users, i.e. upgrade/remove
> * Admin has control over the theme, layout etc while the Editor doesn't.
> In short, Editors can wreck havoc on all content while Admins can also
> do the same to the layout while also locking us out. Recently, I saw
> signs of a roll-back feature so that even if recalcitrant Editors were
> to do their worst, Admins can roll back to an earlier date. The same
> comfort is not available for the malicious Admin because the other
> Admins' rights can be removed. The only solution then would be to
> delete the blog and start again, unless Yi Hao has "ghosted"/"snap-shot"
> a version to fall back on.
> While I agree with CDR that we can and should trust almost anybody who
> signs up, my concern here are with spammers and other bot-like
> behaviours. If we were to grant Author rights to anybody (any bot that
> can overcome the simple CAPTCHA), it would be a simple step then to
> spamalot.
> Cheers.
> suhaw

Makes sense. I perform that check at user creation. In other words, one
does not get an account without approval.

But I'm happy to go with open registration of user accounts and
Editor/Admin work flow if that works for you.

Cheers
David

> On 28 February 2011 16:37, C David Rigby <c.davi...@gmail.com

[Ho Yi Hao Pipat]

Currently, all new user are registered as subscriber. Then from there,
they should drop an email to confirmed admin to upgrade their rights.

I think we should be careful as to what rights we give the user. For me,
I've been managing sites for sometimes now and I feel safer if we give
them a contributer status until a certain number of admin or editor
feels that the user should be upgraded to an author status.

For the issue of wrecking trouble, all I can do on my side is to do
backup. But backup are only as good as the previous update which might
create some downtime as well.

From all our conversation, I proposed the following to the back-end of
the site.

Administrator role should only be given to a "limited" number of user
who are proficient with managing the site or as recommended by other
admins.

Editor role should be given to a selected number of user who have
volunteered their time to help ensure that the content of the site are
valid as well as maintain a certain level of quality with regards to the
post on the site.

Author role should be given to user who have showed constant interest in
building the community and continues to contribute quality article on
the site.

Contributer role should be given to user who wants to contribute.

Subscriber role shall remain as the default user registration role and
will only be upgraded to a contributer role at the user request.

Site back-end: The site will be backed up on a daily basis on server end
[the entire site] and wordpress end [the contents] I volunteer to manage
the backup and will make the wordpress back up available to all admins.

How does that sound to you guys?

--
With Regards,
Yi Hao

yiha...@gmail.com

[C David Rigby]

Sounds good to me!

Cheers
David