Discussion: A radically new TPFC

[Andrew Lee]

This idea has been brewing in my head for over a year now, and I simply can't ignore it any longer . So I thought I'd throw it out, share it with you guys and gather feedback on how to resolve certain issues with the idea.

As TPFC gains in popularity, the current mode of operation simply cannot scale with 5-6 moderators manually updating the database. I am sure that the moderators would agree with me that adding new entries to the database, or simply updating the version is a time-consuming task, not to mention participating in the forums and moderating the comments section.

I thought in order to scale, TFPC should become more like a wiki. Anyone can add an entry to the database, and each entry will have its own discussion area, and revision history etc. It won't be like a free-form wiki, but more like a structure wiki, where there are certain fields (description, extraction method etc.) that one has to fill in to create a new entry, and the other stuff goes into the discussion area (like the comments section now).

But at the same time, I like the database to be personal, because that's how it started in the first place (to keep track of the PFC I use), and that's how it is going to remain useful to me (so that I will continue to find interest in the site and be motivated to maintain it).

So the idea I have is to have individual "streams". For example, in Andrew's stream, I will pick the entries I like from the wiki and add them to my stream. Other's can do the same as well. So you can follow my stream, or follow usdcs' stream for example, or both etc. Similarly, you can search from my stream, or from someone else's stream, or search the entire wiki/database. The front-page of TPFC, for example, will still default to my stream, or you can make it default to your own stream, for example.

Some questions that have been troubling me:

- Is this too complicated vs the current approach? Is this "stream" idea too complex?

- Will the database becomes filled with rubbish? How does other user-maintained systems deal with this?

- Will the database entries get corrupted? If anyone can update the entries, how does one prevent another person from corrupting an entry that I have painstakingly added?

- Is there an existing CMS system that will do, or does it have to be created from scratch? I have been googling around and couldn't find anything similar.

This is just to get some discussion going. I hope those of you who are more knowledgeable in this area can help to contribute some important ideas.

Thanks!

[freakazoid]

I think as long as you keep it simple, it should be okay.

You could have moderated, public submissions, where a moderator would have to okay the new submission.

"Streams" are an interesting concept; but maybe instead of streams, have a "favorites" system, where users can tag their favorite apps and you could view this list by clicking on the user's profile.

I'm not too familiar with wikis (I know Wikipedia is powered by MediaWiki), but I do know a little bit about CMSs.

[hdlbob]

Glad to hear you have more plans for this fantastic site, Andrew. I'm just a user of the apps and not a developer. I like your idea of a wiki with personal streams. Another idea to consider is tagging by category. You already have a few fields to describe whether an app modifies the registry, writes to a local directory, has relative path names etc. It would nice if such characteristics could be added by users. Then each new or updated app could be tagged accordingly. That would be a way for potential users to filter apps to find the ones suitable for an intended usage by simply selecting a group of tags. I haven't thought enough about how to implement it, so I apologize for not providing a solution along with the problem. Again, thank you for PortableFreewareCollection.

[castman]

I am big fan of your idea Andrew, TPFC .

Two things to consider, and I think the most important ones, are the weight of data and the bandwidth.

I don't know how to implement this, however these problems should be concerned since the computers depend a lot on them .

[m^(2)]

I'm afraid of noobs adding a lot of unportable stuff. I think there should be some way to tell that an entry can be trusted.

One way of dealing with the issue is adding fields that are obligatory and too hard to understand for sb. who has no idea about the topic, at least it should prevent flooding TPFC with such entries.

Another idea of improving reliability is having 3 types of entries:
-Pending. Just after addition an entry isn't added but waits for moderator acceptance. Moderator checks only if all fields are filled with stuff that makes sense.
-Active. Just a regular wiki entry
-Certified. Staff checked correctness of all fields. Can't be modified by regular users.

Streams / favourities is a kind of certification too, but I think that blocking changes is right in such cases.


Another idea:
Allow users adding feature comparisons.

[Andrew Lee]

Thanks for your comments. They simulated more ideas in my head, which I will detail below.

Let's say there are a few classes of users: browsers, members, moderators.

Browsers are everyone who is not registered as a member in the TPFC forum i.e. passer-bys. These people will only have the ability to browse the database/forums.

Members have registered accounts with TPFC. They are able to keep a "favorites" list by marking entries in the database. They are also allowed to create new entries in the database. When new entries are created, it is automatically included in their "favorites" list, but is not automatically visible to anyone else.

We started with a trusted group of moderators. There is a way for moderaters to view all new entries created by members. If a moderator likes an entry, he can add that entry to his "favorites" list. If >1 moderator adds an entry to his "favorites" list, that entry becomes visible in the main page. Once a member has created three entries that becomes visible in the main page, he becomes a moderator himself.

Each entry in the main TPFC page therefore has > 1 moderater backing it up at any moment. Each member can still view/search within his own favorites list (or another person's favorite list), but the main TPFC page is in a way a result of the "votes" casted by the moderators. That sounds like a way to keep rubbish off the main page, and permits someone like myself to view/search my own list. Any crap created will largely be invisible except to the author himself.

Moderators are also given greater leeway to update existing entries. An audit trail will be kept so that members can see who changed what to which entries, and to revert to a previous version if necessary.

@m^(2): Allow users adding feature comparisons. Any details on what form it will take?

[Zach Thibeau]

well for one thing I would like to see this forum upgraded from phpBB2 to phpBB3 as for a cms I think one could be done with either a home brew system or even a integration script IE Joomla or even wordpress

[m^(2)]

Thanks for your comments. They simulated more ideas in my head, which I will detail below.

Let's say there are a few classes of users: browsers, members, moderators.

Browsers are everyone who is not registered as a member in the TPFC forum i.e. passer-bys. These people will only have the ability to browse the database/forums.

Members have registered accounts with TPFC. They are able to keep a "favorites" list by marking entries in the database. They are also allowed to create new entries in the database. When new entries are created, it is automatically included in their "favorites" list, but is not automatically visible to anyone else.

We started with a trusted group of moderators. There is a way for moderaters to view all new entries created by members. If a moderator likes an entry, he can add that entry to his "favorites" list. If >1 moderator adds an entry to his "favorites" list, that entry becomes visible in the main page. Once a member has created three entries that becomes visible in the main page, he becomes a moderator himself.

Each entry in the main TPFC page therefore has > 1 moderater backing it up at any moment. Each member can still view/search within his own favorites list (or another person's favorite list), but the main TPFC page is in a way a result of the "votes" casted by the moderators. That sounds like a way to keep rubbish off the main page, and permits someone like myself to view/search my own list. Any crap created will largely be invisible except to the author himself.

Moderators are also given greater leeway to update existing entries. An audit trail will be kept so that members can see who changed what to which entries, and to revert to a previous version if necessary.

@m^(2): Allow users adding feature comparisons. Any details on what form it will take?

Your idea of extending the moderators team is very nice.

Comaprisons: Just a set of tables, like in wikipedia
Example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison ... s#Features
They can be very helpful when choosing the right program.

[Andrew Lee]

@Zach Thibeau: Just did it. I can already see some interesting complaints.

Anyway, I had to take the plunge sooner or later. phpBB2 is no longer being maintained, so no more security patches are being issued.

[castman]

I would suggest to increase accuracy and security about the old members adding new entries to the database. Allow those only that suggest a valid entry to the database. Or, at least increase the membership requirement some months.

For example, I already have more than one year as a member from the forums. Who keeps logging to the forums by more than one year, are surely expert enough, to edit a bit of the database entries.

No, I'm not trying to be boring .

Edit: I had an idea before I went to sleep.

Why not assign power to the forum users this way: Who keeps logging by more than 6 months (probably less) can add new entries and edit only their ones. And to who keeps logging by more than one year, can add entries, edit any entry and only cannot delete the old ones?