I’ve posted this on both the main forum, and the anything else forum.
On the main forum, because that’s where it belongs; and on the anything else forum, because it might stay visible longer.
I see the same questions arising again and again, and I see the same answers laboriously typed out again and again.
Audiominds used to have (and probably still does) an FAQ and music info section, as do other audio sites. And they partially address the problem.
But the problem remains that a moderator or some other “power figure” has to Ok any contribution.
So, wouldn’t it be great to have a wiki on here? If Flavio had the time and space he could put it as part of fasoft, or if not, we could at least ask him to link to it.
All we need is web space with wiki software.
Then everybody can contribute. Anyone can edit contributions. And if someone adds crap, it only takes a click to revert to a previous sensible state.
WIki’s have been called the ultimate democracy, the ultimate method of sharing knowledge.
So, whatya think folks? 
I think it is a great idea if we can get it going.
I don’t really understand wiki’s… (I just thought it was a geek term for an web encyclopedia type of page - being an encyclopedia of a specific topic)
But sounds like it would be good and there would be plenty of people here happy to contribute/help.
Just and extension of the forum really.
Other option if we can’t do a wiki would be to have some sticky topics up the top that covered the main common issues
Rich
I think it’d be great to have a wiki. Aside from the usual troubleshooting stuff that’s been covered so many times, it could be a great source for info on new features not yet covered in the manual.
But I’ve never participated in wiki authoring/editing, so I don’t know how controlled it is (or isn’t). Is it possible for some malcontent to flood it with random text or something? If so, how hard is it to reverse the damage? Will it require Flavio’s constant attention? (If it looks like it will, I have a feeling we’ll never see it.) Hopefully if we agree to let Flavio to include any of the user-created documentation in the manual, he’ll foresee the return on his investment.
I love Wikipedia, and it seems pretty clean of garbage, so I know the concept works on a large scale. Will a smaller community have a harder time keeping things in order?
Anyway, it would be incredibly useful to have some up-to-date on-site documentation, preferably with inline images for screenshots.
Tony
Excellent idea.
I put up a Wiki at work for one project we ran a while back. Easily allows folks to contribute.
I have some webspace with PHP. If you want I’ll put up a Wiki over the next few days, we can have a play, and if we like it we can formalise things and discuss with Flavio.
…one negative point. Ali is right about the same questions getting asked but sometimes the answer is already there a few threads away on the Forum. And still people ask. So a Wiki might not make the problem go away but at least we will have a repository of useful documents to send them to look at.
Let me know about the play Wiki.
Mark
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| http://www.ntrack.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=1;t=3940 |
The first thread I looked at after typing the above. See what I mean - we’ve discussed this several times recently. No offence meant Dean - we’ve all done it; I’m just using your question to emphasise the point.
Wikis are open to abuse and vandalism, but great idea if it can be maintained properly.
I think it would be a great idea.
Wikis are great but rely quite a bit on the practices of those who use them.
Personally, I’d be tempted to edit a lot of stuff, since I’m a rather picky SOB. But I’d respond to feedback to back off. A bigger problem would be from those negative folks who seem to want to ruin anything others are enjoying.
Therefore, I suggest a “slightly moderated” wiki. Dunno if this is easily done, but here goes. To get edit permission for the wiki site, each member would have to send a PM to the moderators, who would enable it for their user name (or just create the same user name on the Wiki site). Anyone who asks gets permission, but if the privilege is abused, permission for that user is turned off. I think that would keep the riff-raff out with a fair minimum of fuss.
A key would be a good organization to start with. Anyone want to take a shot at a good top page or maybe 2-level hierarchy? Of course, an important section would be FAQs, which we may want to sort into general categories after the fact. (Recognizing order rather than imposing it.)
You’re correct JW, a wiki is open to abuse.
But the thing is, it doesn’t need a moderator to police it, the users do that. After every change or edit, the old entry is also kept, all the way back to the beginning.
So if some idiot deletes or modifies an entry, then all it takes is someone, anyone, to click back to the previous sensible entry.
Therefore, as long there’s more sensible users than idiots (which I think is true on here), then it works.
But I don’t like the idea of even a slightly moderated wiki Jeff, that sort of defeats the whole idea.
And it puts a burden of work onto those moderators.
And either they won’t like that work and responsibility, which makes it unfair on them; or they will like it, and that makes me shudder; there’s too many mini-Mussolini’s about as it is. 
But, it all depends who sets up it, and they of course, can set it up how they want to.
Ali_G - yes, hopefully enough users would be around so that there was always someone keeping an eye.
So maybe it would work. We could always give it a go.
Perhaps a discreet n-Track page would attract less vandals than Wikipedia does. They’re ealways getting attacked.
JW
I started to put one together at lunchtime but didn’t get time to finish. I’ll try again later.
Mark
The purpose of the moderators would only be to ban abusers, and I think that would be useful. The overhead would be extremely low.
We’ve all seen some of the silly stuff that happens here from time to time. But perhaps you’re right that no moderation is needed – we can give it a try and only fix it if it’s broken.
Yes, give it a trial as a wiki editable by anyone. If any problems start becoming unmanageable then perhaps we’ll have to go over moderating.
Also, I like the idea of the wiki being quite dense and information rich - i.e. not too waffly. A reader wants to be able to find information easily. Hopefully eventually the site will become a definitive resource for this sort of thing.
JW
errmm, it’s such a good idea that it seems we have been beaten to it. Have a look at this:
http://www.audiowiki.com/
No n-track section just yet, but why don’t we add one.
Mark
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| why don’t we add one. |
Done.
Now let’s fill it with knowledge
Hi hansje and All:
I was over there and looked around… and registered… Looks like quite the place… to me… Fastenating… 
Bill…
Cool… 
The product sections seem to dominate though - need more on the techniques / tutorials sections.
JW
JW
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| The product sections seem to dominate though - need more on the techniques / tutorials sections. |
Agreed, although a set of “how to” articles for n-Track is a good starting point.
Why didn’t someone tell me there was one before I opened my big mouth!
There doesn’t seem to be much in it though. 
(The wiki that is, not my mouth. 
)
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Why didn’t someone tell me there was one before I opened my big mouth! |
'cos I didn’t know. I was searching for generic domain names for a wiki and I tried audiowiki.com…
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| There doesn’t seem to be much in it though. |
Let’s put it on the map then!