Repair Forum

[Nickel]

Just a thought, but would a new forum that was based around repair be useful?

Nick

[Stuggi]

Yeah, I think is a great idea, esp. if all the restoration (sp?) threads go there as well, it's always a PITA when one has to go and look for them.

[jesawdy]

If thread tagging becomes available, finding some of these things may become simpler. I do think in the interim, a list of restoration-themed threads in the Espresso Gear FAQ and Favorites may be a good solution. Perhaps a corresponding one for leverites too.

Other thoughts/ideas?

[HB]

Just a thought, but would a new forum that was based around repair be useful?

It's tempting to create a dedicated repair/modification forum, but given the site's modest posting rate (around 40-50/day), it's still manageable for the moment. Below are the new forum criteria:

Dedicated forums are best reserved for topic areas with regular activity. A common mistake board owners make is creating too many forums in the misguided attempt to organize topics instead of active discussions. It typically results in "dead" sections of the board.

As a few rules of thumb, I advise creating a forum when there is a minimum of three pages of non-trivial existing threads in other forums, its topic area aligns well with the site's overall mission ("your guide to exceptional espresso"), there is a developing audience to the specific topic area, and finally a Team HB member (or potential member) has specific interest in leading the discussion of the nascent discussion.

The latest forums created under these guidelines are Home Roasting and Coffees. The latter has caught on and is clearly going to stay. The Home Roasting forum's future is less certain (e.g., one page spans +8 weeks of discussion, which suggests it is hasn't reached a critical mass of adherents).

That's a problem all forums struggle with: How to unearth the jewels buried among more mundane discussions? I suggest starting with indexing strategies (e.g., FAQs and Favorites, social bookmarks like del.icio.us, dedicated search). This will become easier with the next version of phpBB since it natively supports bookmarking. I don't think it supports tagging, but I would like to add it to improve search results. For example, in your case, all noteworthy threads related to restoration would be tagged as such, and search results could be limited to threads tagged with it.

(From New Forum Suggestion: Vintage Espresso Machine Repair & Restoration.)

Yeah, I think is a great idea, esp. if all the restoration (sp?) threads go there as well, it's always a PITA when one has to go and look for them.

I've put effort into the FAQs and Favorites for each forum, which are bundled up in this article, in the hope that it encourages (a) self-service searching, and (b) motivates high-quality discussion by recognizing those creating FAQ-worthy threads. The "related topics" list at the end of each thread helps too. I'm looking into tagging or an extension of the personal bookmarking supported by the next version of phpBB. Those who use del.icio.us may recognize this icon:

(click here to see my bookmarks)

For logged in users, it appears above the author of the first post. I know, I know... it's well hidden, I should make it more obvious and add some other community bookmark sites like digg. In short, the focus is on improving the site's search-ability and cross-references.

[Ken Fox]

I've put effort into the FAQs and Favorites for each forum, which are bundled up in this article, in the hope that it encourages (a) self-service searching, and (b) motivates high-quality discussion by recognizing those creating FAQ-worthy threads

and:

I've put effort into the FAQs and Favorites for each forum, which are bundled up in this article, in the hope that it encourages (a) self-service searching, and (b) motivates high-quality discussion by recognizing those creating FAQ-worthy threads.

You should never have turned me on to this forum, Dan

I've looked through the FAQ document and the problem I see with it is that it seems largely to equate the value of threads with the number of follow up posts they produce.

Not surprisingly, I am most familiar with threads I have started either intentionally or unintentionally (by a split topic). Among these threads are some garnering lots of responses that, at least in my opinion, are now rubbish pile material since they are either outdated or superseded by points made in other discussions. On the other hand, there are threads I've started that garnered relatively few responses but that made important and enduring points and are still worth reading. A thread can get a lot of responses because it is controversial, but there really isn't much to it. A thread can similarly be relatively profound, making a particular point very clearly, garnering a few concurring comments, and end up looking insignificant when in fact it is significant and important and covers something that hasn't been clearly stated before. This sort of thread, arguably more valuable than many with 81 responses, gets lost in the system.

Some time back, when there was discussion with Jim Schulman about creating some sort of archive here, I remember that the idea was batted around that some people should be asked to produce a list of the threads they think made the most significant and enduring points, still valid even in the light of more recent discussions. This would require some work, but I think it would produce a much more useful set of FAQs or threads to be highlighted, than what (in my view) you have so far.

ken

[HB]

Anyone can nominate an entry for the FAQs and Favorites by replying to the sticky in the forum. Many of the selections to-date were my choices, others were added by another moderator. The number of replies isn't part of my criteria, though they do often correlate because interesting topics usually get more replies, and interest is one of my criteria.