VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
60 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Tom Purl 2
I've done a bit of work on the vimtips wiki at Google the last few days,
and it's come to my attention that it isn't really designed to do what
we want it to do.  The Google wiki is designed to be used by a small
number of people working on a particular open source project.  It is not
designed to be editable by hundreds (or possibly thousands) of users to
exchange tips on using an application.

The basic bottleneck is that only "project members" can edit the wiki,
meaning that these will be the only people who can add or edit tips.
The only way to become a project member is to have a project admin (so
far, me) visit the project's admin interface and add him or her.  There
is no web interface or other functionality in place to do this in a more
automated way.

This awkward user-registration process will most certainly keep people
from contributing or updating tips.  It will also create a lot of
tedious and error-proned work for the project's admins, even if I were to
add a dozen more.

So as I see it, we have two things we need to do if we want to keep the
wiki conversion project moving:

1. Define our wiki requirements
    * Do we want anonymous users to be able to contribute at all like
      they can on vim.org/tips today?
    * Does the wiki have to be hosted by Google, or is it ok if we move
      to another wiki host if they match all of our requirements?
        * This question is probably mostly for Bram, since he first
          suggested the Google wiki.
        * I personally really like Google in general.  They just don't
          have the apps that we need today.
    * Cost?
        * I'm assuming that the ideal number if free :)
    * Embedded WYSIWYG editor, etc.

2. Choose the wiki host that best suits our needs
    * I see two options:
        * Wait for Google to meet all of our requirements?
            * Google recently acquired JotSpot, so maybe that wiki will
              be functional enough to meet all of our requirements
              some day.
        * Find a different wiki host that does meet all of our
          requirements, and should be able to do so for at least 3
          years or so.

So what do you guys think?

Tom Purl


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

iler.ml
On 2/23/07, Tom Purl <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I've done a bit of work on the vimtips wiki at Google the last few days,
> and it's come to my attention that it isn't really designed to do what
> we want it to do.  The Google wiki is designed to be used by a small
> number of people working on a particular open source project.  It is not
> designed to be editable by hundreds (or possibly thousands) of users to
> exchange tips on using an application.
>
> The basic bottleneck is that only "project members" can edit the wiki,
> meaning that these will be the only people who can add or edit tips.
> The only way to become a project member is to have a project admin (so
> far, me) visit the project's admin interface and add him or her.  There
> is no web interface or other functionality in place to do this in a more
> automated way.
>
> This awkward user-registration process will most certainly keep people
> from contributing or updating tips.  It will also create a lot of
> tedious and error-proned work for the project's admins, even if I were to
> add a dozen more.
>
> So as I see it, we have two things we need to do if we want to keep the
> wiki conversion project moving:
>
> 1. Define our wiki requirements
>     * Do we want anonymous users to be able to contribute at all like
>       they can on vim.org/tips today?
>     * Does the wiki have to be hosted by Google, or is it ok if we move
>       to another wiki host if they match all of our requirements?
>         * This question is probably mostly for Bram, since he first
>           suggested the Google wiki.
>         * I personally really like Google in general.  They just don't
>           have the apps that we need today.
>     * Cost?
>         * I'm assuming that the ideal number if free :)
>     * Embedded WYSIWYG editor, etc.
>
> 2. Choose the wiki host that best suits our needs
>     * I see two options:
>         * Wait for Google to meet all of our requirements?
>             * Google recently acquired JotSpot, so maybe that wiki will
>               be functional enough to meet all of our requirements
>               some day.
>         * Find a different wiki host that does meet all of our
>           requirements, and should be able to do so for at least 3
>           years or so.
>
> So what do you guys think?

My opinion is that that wikipedia-style wiki is the best. It's scalable,
it proved itself, i think it's easy on admins, afaik it's used not only by
 wikipedia.

Regarding anonymous contributions, they proved problematic on vim.org/tips.
Anonymous contrib was what created uneditable tips in the first place
on vim.org/tips. The idea was "only the author can edit the post", but
since anonymous tips have no registered authors, they are totally uneditable,
which is hardly an advantage.

I question the value of anonymous posts. First. Are we exchanging the rootkits
or pirated software ? We are not. What is the value of anonymous in
the opensource community ?
Second. If someone can remain anonymous, he can register as
[hidden email] and remain anonymous but still having registration.

Yakov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Muskoka Auto Parts Limited
In reply to this post by Tom Purl 2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 23-Feb-07, at 3:00 PM, Brian McKee wrote:

> On 23-Feb-07, at 2:32 PM, Tom Purl wrote:
>> I've done a bit of work on the vimtips wiki at Google the last few  
>> days,
>> and it's come to my attention that it isn't really designed to do  
>> what
>> we want it to do.
>> {snippage}
>> So what do you guys think?
>
> I think the whole point behind using a wiki is to make it easy for  
> people to contribute.
> Forcing a manual registration process defeats the whole purpose of  
> the thing in my mind.
>
> Brian

Whoops - wrong reply button...  Redirected above to list and added  
below.

On 23-Feb-07, at 3:04 PM, Yakov Lerner wrote:

> Regarding anonymous contributions, they proved problematic on  
> vim.org/tips.
> Anonymous contrib was what created uneditable tips in the first place
> on vim.org/tips. The idea was "only the author can edit the post", but
> since anonymous tips have no registered authors, they are totally  
> uneditable,
> which is hardly an advantage.
>
> I question the value of anonymous posts. First. Are we exchanging  
> the rootkits
> or pirated software ? We are not. What is the value of anonymous in
> the opensource community ?
> Second. If someone can remain anonymous, he can register as
> [hidden email] and remain anonymous but still having registration.

I think the point is not 'anonymous' per se - obviously identity  
can't easily be proved anyway.
A very simple registration process that doesn't require 3rd party  
intervention or waiting on email is best I think.
Enough to slow down the spammers without slowing down the users.
As Yakov points out, if people could easily edit things now, the spam  
would long since have been removed.
Make sure the wiki has an easy 'rollback' feature to remove spam and  
RSS feeds and I'm happy.

Brian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
Comment: Verify this email or encrypt your email for free - see gnupg.org

iD8DBQFF30wqGnOmb9xIQHQRAiEsAJ4i1jJ1k3wRTZ38V3CVB4evqfHj+ACg0P1J
mTf+V/p33jWAxI+/SK1upLg=
=4FWR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

A.J.Mechelynck
In reply to this post by Tom Purl 2
Tom Purl wrote:
> I've done a bit of work on the vimtips wiki at Google the last few days,
> and it's come to my attention that it isn't really designed to do what
> we want it to do.  The Google wiki is designed to be used by a small
> number of people working on a particular open source project.  It is not
> designed to be editable by hundreds (or possibly thousands) of users to
> exchange tips on using an application.

I guess we need (if possible) something along the lines of "the" wiki,
<language>.wikipedia.org

>
> The basic bottleneck is that only "project members" can edit the wiki,
> meaning that these will be the only people who can add or edit tips.
> The only way to become a project member is to have a project admin (so
> far, me) visit the project's admin interface and add him or her.  There
> is no web interface or other functionality in place to do this in a more
> automated way.
>
> This awkward user-registration process will most certainly keep people
> from contributing or updating tips.  It will also create a lot of
> tedious and error-proned work for the project's admins, even if I were to
> add a dozen more.

Or give every member admin privileges, but I suppose that isn't wise either.
IMHO every wiki needs admins even if everyone can get an account and edit any
page.

>
> So as I see it, we have two things we need to do if we want to keep the
> wiki conversion project moving:
>
> 1. Define our wiki requirements
>     * Do we want anonymous users to be able to contribute at all like
>       they can on vim.org/tips today?
>     * Does the wiki have to be hosted by Google, or is it ok if we move
>       to another wiki host if they match all of our requirements?
>         * This question is probably mostly for Bram, since he first
>           suggested the Google wiki.
>         * I personally really like Google in general.  They just don't
>           have the apps that we need today.

Google, Schmoogle, I don't care. Ideally an alias DNS record should be set up,
so that wiki.vim.org will bring us to the wiki frontpage, wherever it's
hosted. Or is that impossible due to the way vim.org is entangled with
sourceforge?

>     * Cost?
>         * I'm assuming that the ideal number if free :)
>     * Embedded WYSIWYG editor, etc.

Embedded WYSIWIG editor is a "cherry on the cake": en.wikipedia.org has no
WYSIWIG editing but if we could lay hands on something working that way (and
at that price, i.e., free as in beer), IMHO we shouldn't think twice about it.

For complex editing we have Vim anyway ;-). Some browsers can use it directly
to edit textareas, and for others we can shuttle back and forth via the clipboard.

>
> 2. Choose the wiki host that best suits our needs
>     * I see two options:
>         * Wait for Google to meet all of our requirements?
>             * Google recently acquired JotSpot, so maybe that wiki will
>               be functional enough to meet all of our requirements
>               some day.
>         * Find a different wiki host that does meet all of our
>           requirements, and should be able to do so for at least 3
>           years or so.

Only three years? For how long have the tips & scripts been hosted by
sourceforge? I imagine that three years from now the project may be barely up
to speed; the longer the better, and I'd say 5 years minimum.

>
> So what do you guys think?
>
> Tom Purl
>
>
>

A last-minute thought: would it be possible to name the project
vim.wikipedia.org or something (and set it up in Wikipedia space)? Hm, I guess
not: there might already be some obscure language with the ISO code "vim"...


Best regards,
Tony.
--
Beware of low-flying butterflies.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

A.J.Mechelynck
In reply to this post by iler.ml
Yakov Lerner wrote:
[...]

> My opinion is that that wikipedia-style wiki is the best. It's scalable,
> it proved itself, i think it's easy on admins, afaik it's used not only by
> wikipedia.
>
> Regarding anonymous contributions, they proved problematic on vim.org/tips.
> Anonymous contrib was what created uneditable tips in the first place
> on vim.org/tips. The idea was "only the author can edit the post", but
> since anonymous tips have no registered authors, they are totally
> uneditable,
> which is hardly an advantage.
>
> I question the value of anonymous posts. First. Are we exchanging the
> rootkits
> or pirated software ? We are not. What is the value of anonymous in
> the opensource community ?
> Second. If someone can remain anonymous, he can register as
> [hidden email] and remain anonymous but still having registration.
>
> Yakov
>

*.wikipedia.org allows anonymous users (shown as a dotted-quad) to edit
anything; but their edits, if seen as malicious, will be reversed with less
qualms that those of any username-password user. Also, 123.45.67.89 is not a
proof-of-identity (I'd say most people today are, like me, on
dynamically-addressed connections) but at least it gives you an idea of which
country and ISP the culprit is from.


Best regards,
Tony.
--
If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Tom Purl 2
In reply to this post by Tom Purl 2
> I guess we need (if possible) something along the lines of "the" wiki,
> <language>.wikipedia.org

Mediawiki (the wiki engine used by Wikipedia) is very nice, and it's the
one I'm leaning towards also.

>> This awkward user-registration process will most certainly keep
>> people from contributing or updating tips.  It will also create a lot
>> of tedious and error-proned work for the project's admins, even if I
>> were to add a dozen more.

> Or give every member admin privileges, but I suppose that isn't wise
> either.  IMHO every wiki needs admins even if everyone can get an
> account and edit any page.

I agree.


>> So as I see it, we have two things we need to do if we want to keep the
>> wiki conversion project moving:
>>
>> 1. Define our wiki requirements
>> ...
>>     * Does the wiki have to be hosted by Google, or is it ok if we move
>>       to another wiki host if they match all of our requirements?
>>         * This question is probably mostly for Bram, since he first
>>           suggested the Google wiki.
>>         * I personally really like Google in general.  They just don't
>>           have the apps that we need today.

> Google, Schmoogle, I don't care. Ideally an alias DNS record should be
> set up, so that wiki.vim.org will bring us to the wiki frontpage,
> wherever it's hosted. Or is that impossible due to the way vim.org is
> entangled with sourceforge?

I don't know if this option is possible right now without paying for
hosting.

>>     * Cost?
>>         * I'm assuming that the ideal number if free :)
>>     * Embedded WYSIWYG editor, etc.
>
> Embedded WYSIWIG editor is a "cherry on the cake": en.wikipedia.org
> has no WYSIWIG editing but if we could lay hands on something working
> that way (and at that price, i.e., free as in beer), IMHO we shouldn't
> think twice about it.

Yeah, this was a foolish question.  We're all plain-text lovers anyways
if we're using Vim :)

>> 2. Choose the wiki host that best suits our needs
>>     * I see two options:
>>         * Wait for Google to meet all of our requirements?
>>             * Google recently acquired JotSpot, so maybe that wiki will
>>               be functional enough to meet all of our requirements
>>               some day.
>>         * Find a different wiki host that does meet all of our
>>           requirements, and should be able to do so for at least 3
>>           years or so.
>
> Only three years? For how long have the tips & scripts been hosted by
> sourceforge? I imagine that three years from now the project may be
> barely up to speed; the longer the better, and I'd say 5 years
> minimum.

Sounds good to me.  I was just throwing out a number.

> A last-minute thought: would it be possible to name the project
> vim.wikipedia.org or something (and set it up in Wikipedia space)? Hm,
> I guess not: there might already be some obscure language with the ISO
> code "vim"...

I think we're putting the cart in front of the horse here.  Let's
satisfy all of the requirements first before we settle on the wiki
engine.

Thanks!

Tom Purl


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

A.J.Mechelynck
In reply to this post by Muskoka Auto Parts Limited
Brian McKee wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On 23-Feb-07, at 3:00 PM, Brian McKee wrote:
>> On 23-Feb-07, at 2:32 PM, Tom Purl wrote:
>>> I've done a bit of work on the vimtips wiki at Google the last few days,
>>> and it's come to my attention that it isn't really designed to do what
>>> we want it to do.
>>> {snippage}
>>> So what do you guys think?
>>
>> I think the whole point behind using a wiki is to make it easy for
>> people to contribute.
>> Forcing a manual registration process defeats the whole purpose of the
>> thing in my mind.
>>
>> Brian
>
> Whoops - wrong reply button...  Redirected above to list and added below.
>
> On 23-Feb-07, at 3:04 PM, Yakov Lerner wrote:
>> Regarding anonymous contributions, they proved problematic on
>> vim.org/tips.
>> Anonymous contrib was what created uneditable tips in the first place
>> on vim.org/tips. The idea was "only the author can edit the post", but
>> since anonymous tips have no registered authors, they are totally
>> uneditable,
>> which is hardly an advantage.
>>
>> I question the value of anonymous posts. First. Are we exchanging the
>> rootkits
>> or pirated software ? We are not. What is the value of anonymous in
>> the opensource community ?
>> Second. If someone can remain anonymous, he can register as
>> [hidden email] and remain anonymous but still having registration.
>
> I think the point is not 'anonymous' per se - obviously identity can't
> easily be proved anyway.
> A very simple registration process that doesn't require 3rd party
> intervention or waiting on email is best I think.

Waiting for email (with a pseudorandom confirmation code) proves that the
registration wasn't requested "in your name" by someone else. It requires no
human intervention server-side and only a few minutes' wait client-side while
greatly improving security. It also proves that your "email-address-of-record"
with the wiki is really yours. I'm for it.

> Enough to slow down the spammers without slowing down the users.
> As Yakov points out, if people could easily edit things now, the spam
> would long since have been removed.
> Make sure the wiki has an easy 'rollback' feature to remove spam and RSS
> feeds and I'm happy.

Indeed, with a history & diff feature as on "the" Wiki.

>
> Brian


Best regards,
Tony.
--
This life is a test.  It is only a test.  Had this been an actual life,
you would have received further instructions as to what to do and where
to go.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Muskoka Auto Parts Limited
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 23-Feb-07, at 3:55 PM, A.J.Mechelynck wrote:

> Waiting for email (with a pseudorandom confirmation code) proves  
> that the registration wasn't requested "in your name" by someone  
> else. It requires no human intervention server-side and only a few  
> minutes' wait client-side while greatly improving security. It also  
> proves that your "email-address-of-record" with the wiki is really  
> yours. I'm for it.

I recently watched a video demoing software that automates the entire  
registration by email process to various brands of online forums -  
including grabbing a random account from a free email provider,  
filling out the forum registration and captcha, receiving the  
confirmation email and responding to it, then posting it's 'message'  
to the forum....  Wish I had the link handy.    I suspect the days of  
register by email as spam defence are numbered.

It does prove your email address of record though - I hadn't  
considered that.

Brian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
Comment: Verify this email or encrypt your email for free - see gnupg.org

iD8DBQFF31oDGnOmb9xIQHQRAkV6AKDW/AcSmm5nGrLItre2b/2+7O75BgCguMxM
NlmkOUCqj8LA6SrZMGrm4l4=
=83Aa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

A.J.Mechelynck
Brian McKee wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 23-Feb-07, at 3:55 PM, A.J.Mechelynck wrote:
>
>> Waiting for email (with a pseudorandom confirmation code) proves that
>> the registration wasn't requested "in your name" by someone else. It
>> requires no human intervention server-side and only a few minutes'
>> wait client-side while greatly improving security. It also proves that
>> your "email-address-of-record" with the wiki is really yours. I'm for it.
>
> I recently watched a video demoing software that automates the entire
> registration by email process to various brands of online forums -
> including grabbing a random account from a free email provider, filling
> out the forum registration and captcha, receiving the confirmation email
> and responding to it, then posting it's 'message' to the forum....  Wish
> I had the link handy.    I suspect the days of register by email as spam
> defence are numbered.
>
> It does prove your email address of record though - I hadn't considered
> that.
>
> Brian

Yes: so if the account is set to get email in some circumstances, the email
will go to the owner of the account: confirmed registration prevents joe-jobs.


Best regards,
Tony.
--
"I profoundly believe it takes a lot of practice to become a moral
slob."
                -- William F. Buckley

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

John Beckett
In reply to this post by Tom Purl 2
I like the concept of using the Google wiki. In addition to the "Google
is Good" factor, there is the likelihood of very high reliability and zero
cost. Also, it seems appropriate due to Bram's work.

As has been pointed out, spam is a really big threat, and will get
worse (more automated) every year. I don't see why we should ask
anyone here to take on the job of manually removing junk. The
problems of using the Google wiki may be a benefit in the future.

How about this concept: Use the Google wiki with a dozen admins.
Those admins are likely to be here, and either have a Google ID or
would be willing to get one.

Create a new mailing list ([hidden email]), or use an existing list
with a convention that the subject should start with "vimtip".

On the wiki, explain how to post a tip by emailing the tip to the
agreed mail account. That would require the user to join the list.
Alternative: Have an automated account that forwards any mail
including "vimtip" to the agreed mailing list.

A discussion here would then massage the tip and decide its fate.
Perhaps it is too similar to an existing tip, or perhaps it should be
incorporated into an existing tip. After a week, a kind wiki admin
would post the final tip to the wiki.

---Benefits---
No spam on wiki.
Each posted tip will be massaged and worthwhile.
Tips on similar topics could be arranged together.

Someone with a tip doesn't have to worry if it's "good"
(it will only be posted if the community likes it).
That might encourage tippers.

---Problems---
No WYSIWYG editing (might be a benefit - uniform style).
Burden on community to edit tip within a few days
(and likelihood of unresolved arguments).
Burden on admins to post tip.

Some tippers will be offended when their work is edited
or rejected. That might discourage tippers.

John

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Bram Moolenaar

John Beckett wrote:

> I like the concept of using the Google wiki. In addition to the "Google
> is Good" factor, there is the likelihood of very high reliability and zero
> cost. Also, it seems appropriate due to Bram's work.
>
> As has been pointed out, spam is a really big threat, and will get
> worse (more automated) every year. I don't see why we should ask
> anyone here to take on the job of manually removing junk. The
> problems of using the Google wiki may be a benefit in the future.
>
> How about this concept: Use the Google wiki with a dozen admins.
> Those admins are likely to be here, and either have a Google ID or
> would be willing to get one.
>
> Create a new mailing list ([hidden email]), or use an existing list
> with a convention that the subject should start with "vimtip".
>
> On the wiki, explain how to post a tip by emailing the tip to the
> agreed mail account. That would require the user to join the list.
> Alternative: Have an automated account that forwards any mail
> including "vimtip" to the agreed mailing list.
>
> A discussion here would then massage the tip and decide its fate.
> Perhaps it is too similar to an existing tip, or perhaps it should be
> incorporated into an existing tip. After a week, a kind wiki admin
> would post the final tip to the wiki.
>
> ---Benefits---
> No spam on wiki.
> Each posted tip will be massaged and worthwhile.
> Tips on similar topics could be arranged together.
>
> Someone with a tip doesn't have to worry if it's "good"
> (it will only be posted if the community likes it).
> That might encourage tippers.
>
> ---Problems---
> No WYSIWYG editing (might be a benefit - uniform style).
> Burden on community to edit tip within a few days
> (and likelihood of unresolved arguments).
> Burden on admins to post tip.
>
> Some tippers will be offended when their work is edited
> or rejected. That might discourage tippers.

I think this puts too much burdon the volunteers that become an admin.
And it defeats the easy of use of a wiki.

I do think that we can do the addition of new people who want to be able
to edit the wiki manually.  That should also filter out the spammers.
There is only a delay between wanting to edit the wiki and being able to
do it the first time.  Not perfect, but it's something that we can setup
right now and try out.

--
A bad peace is better than a good war. - Yiddish Proverb

 /// Bram Moolenaar -- [hidden email] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
///        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\        download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
 \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

iler.ml
On 2/24/07, Bram Moolenaar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I do think that we can do the addition of new people who want to be able
> to edit the wiki manually.

Your "manual" binds here to "the addition", correct ? Not to the
"edit the wiki", correct, Bram ?
Did you mean here
    "we can do manual addition of new people who want to be able to
edit the wiki",
Bram ?

Yakov
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

John Beckett
In reply to this post by Bram Moolenaar
Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> I think this puts too much burdon the volunteers that become an admin.
> And it defeats the easy of use of a wiki.

I was suggesting that people who have a tip, or a change, would
email it to a Vim mailing list, where it would be massaged by the
community, then posted to the wiki by an admin. Yes, that would
burden the admins, and is against the spirit of a wiki.

However, as I understand the Google wiki, a person wanting to post
a tip would need to have a Google ID, and would have to mail an
admin, and the admin would have to add the new person as an admin,
then reply to the mail.

That's also a pain for an admin, and is not really easy use of a wiki
either. And which admin would be emailed?

John

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

gregory.sacre
John Beckett ([hidden email]) wrote:

> Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> >I think this puts too much burdon the volunteers that become an admin.
> >And it defeats the easy of use of a wiki.
>
> I was suggesting that people who have a tip, or a change, would
> email it to a Vim mailing list, where it would be massaged by the
> community, then posted to the wiki by an admin. Yes, that would
> burden the admins, and is against the spirit of a wiki.
>
> However, as I understand the Google wiki, a person wanting to post
> a tip would need to have a Google ID, and would have to mail an
> admin, and the admin would have to add the new person as an admin,
> then reply to the mail.
>
> That's also a pain for an admin, and is not really easy use of a wiki
> either. And which admin would be emailed?
>
> John
>

Hello all,


I just want to give you some ideas that you could maybe be useful for the Wiki (which I think is a great idea) or its administration.

Concerning the registration, a reply mail for a confirmation of the activation of the membership is a great idea, and would prevent some bots to automatically post on the Wiki.
Moreover, as an upper security level, the registering candidate could be asked to write down the numbers/letters that he/she would see on a picture representing those numbers/letters. That would prevent the registering candidate to be a bot or at least reduce it ever more (I've seen this in a couple of forums around).

I believe that all the members, asking for a registration, should be able to post tips. In order to make it possible, I think that 3 levels of members should be there:

1. Admins   : they manage the users and the wiki (they would have all the rights the reviewers have. See below)
2. Reviewers: the can review, edit and delete any post written in the wiki (it would facilitate the admins burden) and also manage the sections (create, move tips from a section to another, ...)
3. Members  : they can post tips and modify their own post. They become sort of the owner of their post but where reviewers and admins can overlook it

In this way, the responsability is a bit more spread and the admins are not only responsible for the Wiki contents.

Regarding the type of wiki, I just checked out Mediawiki for work and it seems pretty nice but I don't know if it would meet what I proposed but if you think my ideas could be used, I could check it out.


I hope it helped.


Gregory SACRE
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

A.J.Mechelynck
[hidden email] wrote:

> John Beckett ([hidden email]) wrote:
>> Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>>> I think this puts too much burdon the volunteers that become an admin.
>>> And it defeats the easy of use of a wiki.
>> I was suggesting that people who have a tip, or a change, would
>> email it to a Vim mailing list, where it would be massaged by the
>> community, then posted to the wiki by an admin. Yes, that would
>> burden the admins, and is against the spirit of a wiki.
>>
>> However, as I understand the Google wiki, a person wanting to post
>> a tip would need to have a Google ID, and would have to mail an
>> admin, and the admin would have to add the new person as an admin,
>> then reply to the mail.
>>
>> That's also a pain for an admin, and is not really easy use of a wiki
>> either. And which admin would be emailed?
>>
>> John
>>
>
> Hello all,
>
>
> I just want to give you some ideas that you could maybe be useful for the Wiki (which I think is a great idea) or its administration.
>
> Concerning the registration, a reply mail for a confirmation of the activation of the membership is a great idea, and would prevent some bots to automatically post on the Wiki.
> Moreover, as an upper security level, the registering candidate could be asked to write down the numbers/letters that he/she would see on a picture representing those numbers/letters. That would prevent the registering candidate to be a bot or at least reduce it ever more (I've seen this in a couple of forums around).
>
> I believe that all the members, asking for a registration, should be able to post tips. In order to make it possible, I think that 3 levels of members should be there:
>
> 1. Admins   : they manage the users and the wiki (they would have all the rights the reviewers have. See below)
> 2. Reviewers: the can review, edit and delete any post written in the wiki (it would facilitate the admins burden) and also manage the sections (create, move tips from a section to another, ...)
> 3. Members  : they can post tips and modify their own post. They become sort of the owner of their post but where reviewers and admins can overlook it

also comment on other people's tips and move other people's comments into the
main text of their own posts. This implies the ability to remove other
people's comments to the member's posts. Or does it?

If possible, the wiki should include a "history" feature to allow reviewers to
reverse malicious postings more easily.

If possible, it would be well (IMO) if users could enable a "mail me" feature
so they would get an email if any page of their choice gets modified, or if
one of their own pages get a new comment.

>
> In this way, the responsability is a bit more spread and the admins are not only responsible for the Wiki contents.
>
> Regarding the type of wiki, I just checked out Mediawiki for work and it seems pretty nice but I don't know if it would meet what I proposed but if you think my ideas could be used, I could check it out.
>
>
> I hope it helped.
>
>
> Gregory SACRE
>

Best regards,
Tony.
--
Every word is like an unnecessary stain on silence and nothingness.
                -- Beckett
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Tom Purl 2
In reply to this post by Bram Moolenaar
> I do think that we can do the addition of new people who want to be
> able to edit the wiki manually.  That should also filter out the
> spammers.  There is only a delay between wanting to edit the wiki and
> being able to do it the first time.  Not perfect, but it's something
> that we can setup right now and try out.

Ok, so here's the proposed workflow:

1. Potential tip editer/adder (Veronica Vimlover) visits the Google
   vimtips project.  On the front page, she sees a message that tells
   her to post a message to 'vimtips-general' Google group if she wants
   to post or edit a tip.
    * Please note that if Veronica visits the wiki page first instead of
      the "Project Home" page, she won't know how to gain the proper
      access to edit wiki pages since for the following reasons:
        1. The wiki page itself doesn't tell you how to gain the
           necessary access to edit pages.
        2. I don's see how you can define a default "FrontPage" for the
           wiki, so we can't specify how to gain edit access on any sort
           of wiki front page.
2. Veronica joins the vimtips Google group and posts a message asking
   someone to please give her the necessary access to edit the wiki
   page.
   * Please note that if she doesn't have a Google id at this point,
     she'll need to acquire one.
3. The admins will monitor the Google group.  When Veronica requests
   access, one of us will "take ownership" of the request by responding
   to the Google group message.
4. When the project admin has the time, he/she will add give Veronica a
   "Project Member" user status, and notify her via the group that she
   has the proper access.
   * Please note that if Veronica only obtained a Google id so that she
     could post to the wiki (like I did), she probably won't check
     either the vimtips group or her Gmail very often.  It is therefore
     possible that Veronica will not know in a timely fashion that she
     has be given the proper access to update the wiki.
   * One probable solution to this problem is that we could have
     Veronica post her wiki access request the vim mailing list.
     This certainly has its advantages, but it might clutter the
     vim mailing list, and it would make it more difficult for the
     admins to spot access requests.
   * Another option would be to have Veronica directly e-mail one of the
     project admins listed on the "Project Home" page, but I think that
     the disadvantages of this solution are pretty obvious (problems
     with admins checking Gmail, vacations, etc).

Ok, I know that was long, but I just wanted everyone to know what was
necessary to implement the process of manually adding wiki editors to
the vimtips project.  This is definitely more labor-intensive and
error-proned than any web app registration process that I've ever seen.
I still think that the process listed sets the registration bar too
high, and it is not conducive to a vibrant, robust wiki.

Also, I know that spam is an issue, but there are tradeoffs.  The
process listed above may eliminate 98% of all spam, but what percentage
of possible wiki editors will it also deter?  Also, we need to compare
the amount of work we would put into deleting spam from a different
member-only wiki each week with the amount of time it takes to add
dozens of wiki users to the Google wiki using the process above.

What do you guys think?  Should we still move ahead with the Google
wiki?

Thanks!

Tom Purl


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Suresh Govindachar`

Tom Purl

  >> I do think that we can do the addition of new people who want
  >> to be able to edit the wiki manually.  That should also filter
  >> out the spammers.  There is only a delay between wanting to
  >> edit the wiki and being able to do it the first time.  Not
  >> perfect, but it's something that we can setup right now and try
  >> out.
  >
  > Ok, so here's the proposed workflow:
  >
  > 1. Potential tip editer/adder (Veronica Vimlover) visits the
  >    Google vimtips project. On the front page, she sees a message
  >    that tells her to post a message to 'vimtips-general' Google
  >    group if she wants to post or edit a tip.
  >     * Please note that if Veronica visits the wiki page first
  >       instead of the "Project Home" page, she won't know how to
  >       gain the proper access to edit wiki pages since for the
  >       following reasons:
  >         1. The wiki page itself doesn't tell you how to gain the
  >            necessary access to edit pages.
  >         2. I don's see how you can define a default "FrontPage"
  >            for the wiki, so we can't specify how to gain edit
  >            access on any sort of wiki front page.
  > 2. Veronica joins the vimtips Google group and posts a message
  >    asking someone to please give her the necessary access to
  >    edit the wiki page.
  >    * Please note that if she doesn't have a Google id at this
  >      point, she'll need to acquire one.
  > 3. The admins will monitor the Google group.  When Veronica
  >    requests access, one of us will "take ownership" of the
  >    request by responding to the Google group message.
  > 4. When the project admin has the time, he/she will add give
  >    Veronica a "Project Member" user status, and notify her via
  >    the group that she has the proper access.
  >    * Please note that if Veronica only obtained a Google id so
  >      that she could post to the wiki (like I did), she probably
  >      won't check either the vimtips group or her Gmail very
  >      often.  It is therefore possible that Veronica will not
  >      know in a timely fashion that she has be given the proper
  >      access to update the wiki.
  >    * One probable solution to this problem is that we could have
  >      Veronica post her wiki access request the vim mailing list.
  >      This certainly has its advantages, but it might clutter the
  >      vim mailing list, and it would make it more difficult for
  >      the admins to spot access requests.
  >    * Another option would be to have Veronica directly e-mail
  >      one of the project admins listed on the "Project Home"
  >      page, but I think that the disadvantages of this solution
  >      are pretty obvious (problems with admins checking Gmail,
  >      vacations, etc).
  >
  > Ok, I know that was long, but I just wanted everyone to know
  > what was necessary to implement the process of manually adding
  > wiki editors to the vimtips project. This is definitely more
  > labor- intensive and error-proned than any web app registration
  > process that I've ever seen. I still think that the process
  > listed sets the registration bar too high, and it is not
  > conducive to a vibrant, robust wiki.
  >
  > Also, I know that spam is an issue, but there are tradeoffs. The
  > process listed above may eliminate 98% of all spam, but what
  > percentage of possible wiki editors will it also deter? Also, we
  > need to compare the amount of work we would put into deleting
  > spam from a different member-only wiki each week with the amount
  > of time it takes to add dozens of wiki users to the Google wiki
  > using the process above.
  >
  > What do you guys think? Should we still move ahead with the
  > Google wiki?
  >
  > Thanks!
  >
  > Tom Purl

  I don't see how this process can prevent the Bad Boss from
  manually acquiring permission and then letting loose his robots to
  add spam-tips.  And he can do this once a week.

  What is wrong with just having a "visual image based manual check"
  as the last step of editing a wiki page?  (I hope you know what I
  mean by "visual image based manual check" -- it is the scheme in
  which the user is shown an slightly distorted image of an alpha
  numeric string and is required to enter that string in a text
  input box.  A robot cannot read the image and so is unable to do
  the entry, but a human can do read the image and do the entry so
  manually.)

  --Suresh

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Denis Perelyubskiy

On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:57:00 -0800, "Suresh Govindachar"
<[hidden email]> said:
>
>   What is wrong with just having a "visual image based manual check"
>   as the last step of editing a wiki page?  (I hope you know what I
>   mean by "visual image based manual check" -- it is the scheme in
>   which the user is shown an slightly distorted image of an alpha
>   numeric string and is required to enter that string in a text
>   input box.  A robot cannot read the image and so is unable to do
>   the entry, but a human can do read the image and do the entry so
>   manually.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha
:)

But Google Wiki does not seem to provide it. On top of it, i could not
quite figure out how to track editing history with google wiki. Maybe
this is available through svn, much like any revision control? If so, it
would not be very user-friendly. It seems that a wikipedia model is
needed, with discussion pages and change history. Otherwise, the idea
seems to be a very good one.

-d
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Denis Perelyubskiy
In reply to this post by Tom Purl 2

On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:43:06 -0600 (CST), "Tom Purl" <[hidden email]>
said:
> > I do think that we can do the addition of new people who want to be
> > able to edit the wiki manually.  That should also filter out the
> > spammers.  There is only a delay between wanting to edit the wiki and
> > being able to do it the first time.  Not perfect, but it's something
> > that we can setup right now and try out.
>
> Ok, so here's the proposed workflow:

I think the whole registration thing is a nightmare. I think given
enough people who are willing to monitor submissions, manual labor
should not be a problem. But google does not seem to be a good place for
tips. While i don't have an alternative at the moment, google is not it.

-d
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: VimTips - Google Wiki Usefulness

Denis Perelyubskiy

On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:06:54 -0800, "Denis Perelyubskiy"
<[hidden email]> said:

>
> On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:43:06 -0600 (CST), "Tom Purl" <[hidden email]>
> said:
> > > I do think that we can do the addition of new people who want to be
> > > able to edit the wiki manually.  That should also filter out the
> > > spammers.  There is only a delay between wanting to edit the wiki and
> > > being able to do it the first time.  Not perfect, but it's something
> > > that we can setup right now and try out.
> >
> > Ok, so here's the proposed workflow:
>
> I think the whole registration thing is a nightmare. I think given
> enough people who are willing to monitor submissions, manual labor
> should not be a problem. But google does not seem to be a good place for
> tips. While i don't have an alternative at the moment, google is not it.

it's bad to reply to one's own post, yes? sorry!

Anyway, I think that a _very_ likely scenario is something like this: i
am reading a tip which i found; i notice that either something is wrong
or incomplete, or a better way of doing something, or a duplicate. I
want to add a quick note. Ugh. I need to log in, get account if I don't
have one, etc, etc. I just won't do it. It seems that a lot of this type
of activity is very "right now", as opposed to deliberate tip editing.
This type of activity would be seriously hindered.

-d
123