Interacting between several categories, or between subcategories and categories. As example Subsystems/Components category and its subcategories could also enter Analysis category and Industry and Market Analysis subcategory.
The Analysis category should only include analyses on things outside of the control of the company or product. I don’t think the category is correctly named, but don’t have another suggestion. Weather and who could buy your product is important to any player in the field and you have to adapt to it. I would probably put Laws & Regulations as a subcategory under it, if I was being rigorous, but it is fine as it is now too.
Made some major changes.
Thank you for the feedback! Please look at the changes and tell me if there’s anything’s ambiguous!
As a general rule I’d like to have few categories and encourage the useage of tags to find things again.
Also ordered and fixed the categories in the main menu…
It looks far better and clearer now.
I like it. But the previous categories were fine too I think.
Looking at it, I think the Lounge still is ambiguous. A lounge usually is for off-topic chit-chat. I’d add a subcategory like off-topic or lounge and rename Scrapyard to something not so negative sounding like … Ideas. I would never make a new post in a scrapyard subcategory if it wasn’t about an idea I came up myself.
Now the only engineering analysis subcategory we have is Scrapyard. I don’t think that’s right.
Also, the Lounge category is a special category. IIRC only users with a trust level of 3 and over can see it by default.
Yeah, Lounge was intended as off-topic, but also for things that don’t fit elsewhere.
If there’s an accumulation of topics of one kind that aren’t off-topic, we can always make a new category for them.
Changed default. Everyone can see it.
Scrapyard was intended as a place for failed projects, prototypes, broken things and finding out things that don’t work. Like my own project or Pierres.
Ideas can go where they fit. Engineering related ideas into Engineering, etc.
Engineering analysis can happen in Engineering or Engineering - System Design if it applies.
If you don’t put a post into a subcategory, instead putting it into the main category (like Engineering), it kind of gets lost in the noise often. There are so many topics inside the category.
Where would I put a topic about looking at the engineering decisions of Makani or Ampyx?
Topics will get “lost”. A forum isn’t a book or a database. People usually post only on the most recent threads. Threads in the categories are sorted with the most recent on top. I don’t think having more categories would do any good.
If it’s about the system in general, like “have flygen on a plane with a tailplane” etc. then System Design. If it’s more about the plite design itself, then crosswind kites / planes.
It is a database I think. I use it as such anyway. When I want to refresh my memory about a topic I go into the relevant subcategory. Two use cases: (1) discussion, (2) reference. Use case 2 is the reason why I make most (all?) of my new topics.
Added a new subcategory: https://forum.awesystems.info/c/analysis/bizdev
It’s a bit preliminary. The name isn’t perfect. I’d like to have a place to discuss, if companies will make it or not and how their systems will develop. Maybe predictions would be more appropriate, but then that causes confusion with the “industry and market analysis” category.
It would be great to have a comparisons wiki using something like @someAWE_cb s awes ~ winning architectures page as the scoring matrix
Leaving the topics outside of a subcategory feels wrong, like throwing your clean clothes in a corner instead of putting them in the closet.
Where should these be for example? General chat / Lounge? General Engineering? Other?
Hmm… the comparisons wiki is something that requires a bit of a larger database. I don’t believe it isn’t well suited to the format of a forum post. That’s content that could be displayed better on the main site of awesystems.info, but can be fed from the forum. Or on its own Wiki. I made a wiki for testing: awesystems.fandom.com Have a look and see if you think it’ll be useful! The best thing would probably be to host one, but I won’t do that now.
We could try to make a Wiki category with a main Post that links all the Wikis. It’s a workaround, but it might do.
You could imagine it like putting them in the closet in a drawer named “Misc”. - We all have that drawer.^^
I’ll make it easy for myself and say the original posters of the thread can decide.^^
I will put mine into a vaguely relevant category, like I’ve done with my Engineering Resources topic. Discourse is unusual in that it even allows not putting posts into a subcategory. I don’t remember that even being an option elsewhere. It shouldn’t be when the category also has subcategories.
@Rodread has five topics in the category: https://forum.awesystems.info/search?q=category%3A7%20%40Rodread%20in%3Afirst%20order%3Alatest_topic
Tangentially related: https://meta.discourse.org/t/require-a-category-for-every-post/24810/14
First idea: Engineering (Miscellaneous).
Oh I said that wrong. I wanted to ask for suggestions for additional categories. Keep in mind though that there shouldn’t be too many.
Can’t set a posting rule to require a subcategory. But at least one can’t post uncategorized (not sure if one could before).
Now the [WIKI] thing- shall we put the wikis all in one category and make a pseudo-wikipedia inside the forum? Have you considered the alternative of putting things on the main page (things elsewhere can still be mirrored on the main page) or the fandom.com wiki? Should I put this up for voting?
Mine then are Engineering (Miscellaneous) and inside the Lounge: Lounge or General Chat. The names of the things don’t matter so much as what their function is: a catch-all.
You could. That would help with finding them again wouldn’t it? As it is now is fine too I think, but then have them stickied maybe and have a master wiki linking to them all. First impression is that I like this suggestion.
I’ve started a few topics with the intention of maybe eventually turning them into wikis once there has been some discussion and content in the topic. I think I’ve noticed if you immediately turn a topic into a wiki there is less interaction, and someone other than the person starting it is unlikely to edit it.
I don’t want to go to an external site to edit things, that sounds like more trouble than just editing a post here, and needs a deliberate decision to go there.
Guys: Please consider that endless posting on the internet, especially getting endlessly dragged down into arcane ratholes like worrying about whether some post is “on-topic”, is not likely to be fruitful use of your mental energy. So far, ten years of internet chit-char have not resulted in much that I can think of. Yes, conversations can often wander, especially when the topic itself is not well-defined. People without actual ideas then fixate on such trivia. Talk is not going to do it. Action is required. Ask yourself: Would AWE be possible without the internet? With that I will wrap it up, and end this post!
Since people will, since they can, still post in the main categories without subcategories, moderators would need to move them there to no real benefit. That’s why I won’t make “misc” subcategories, but if more people demand them, I will.
Ah, let’s just try putting all the Wikis in one category and a sticky post with links and see what happens.^^
Most wikis don’t have a proper category fit anyway.
Don’t think there’d be people working on articles for an external wiki since there are few working on wikis here.
Will move posts there soon and link them in the list soon if noone has done it before I get around to it.
@dougselsam If you want to encourage people to build more, I think doing so in a positive way is more effective. Do you think there would have been more progress if people had not been discussing things? While the benefit might not be large, I don’t think anyone built less because they were busy discussing things online. I mean - even you seem to find the time even though you’ve expressed that building is vastly more important.
I don’t think there is anything more positive than pointing out that individuals can outperform the largest big-name entities. This “secret” information is only “secret” because we are all so used to having our reality defined by by such humongous, often “do-nothing” organizations. They convince us that them doing nothing is the best anyone can do. It becomes comfortable to believe we are powerless, playing into our natural capacity for laziness. The huge corportions then have an endless supply of directionless “employees” who will “do what they re told”, while the universties profit from people who, not seeing a light at the end of the tunnel of their education, stay in school too long, beating the dead horse of their indoctrinated helplessness, while in fact they have full power to make any contribution to society they want, with the only real limitation their own imagination. Within reason. Many people are resistant to this information because they have been so convinced they are helpless that it becomes comfortable. Like a bird whose cage-door is opened, they often nonetheless remain in the cage, because that is what they have become accustomed to.