I agree that Huey’s answer on TopClack was a little vague about the whole checks-and-balances thing, but hopefully I answered a lot of concerns above, and to be fair to him, he was put on the spot and did a good job of conveying our general intent, even if not the specifics. Andrew and I would have come on the show as well to help answer questions, but Huey was traveling so it wasn’t technically feasible to have guests this week. We plan on doing AMAs and so forth soon to help be accountable and available.
Also, please bear in mind: we only really conceived of this site, like, literally three days ago. Even if moving swiftly, we are trying to be deliberate and are working hard to make something that should endure over a long time, long after the three of us have served out our time on the board. So maybe just give us a few more days to write some more specific rules and guidelines and get more people involved. We’re totally making this up as we go along!
Anytime! Like I said, I’m always sympathetic to skepticism/cyncism, so you’re not wrong to feel that way generally. I just think (and hope!) it doesn’t apply in this case—and anyway it’s our intent to prove that to you and everyone else, since words can only go so far.
A lot of people using the site already… seems like a good sign. Although it may be a little rushed, there was no better time to do this than now if this has been in the works. There was a window of opportunity open and when that happens one must capitalize. I look forward to seeing how the site progresses and improves in the years to come.
If it matters, I tried to not be toxic in my comments, because I do want positive discussion, as well.
As may be obvious by my posts, I’m a deeply cynical person (who is also very cautiously optimistic, at the same time). And I do want the community to survive, and NOT to fracture.
But yeah, any time you post an unpopular opinion, there is definitely a good chance that it devolves into a flame war.
Dont get me wrong. I 100% see the benefit of starting the site sooner than later.
The risk with it is that if it isnt functional enough, lots of people would go back to geekhack til it dies and not trust the 3rd or 4th option to come along and the forum community would die out. (And this will be invisible, this is not possible to measure).
They way I saw it, was that if we build the right tool, it wont matter when it’s introduced, it will be good enough that the community will basically have to use it.
Example: QMK. TMK already exists, but QMK just made it so much easier, everyone is now using it. Even large manufactures.
That’s a good point. Well then at the very least, the criticisms from this site will hopefully be incorporated to make either this site or the next, “QMK” good
My only gripe with this website is that you’re complaining about it like the whole community doesn’t remember that YOU DIDN’T PAY PYRO FOR RENDERS AND MADE HIM RESORT TO PUBLICLY CALLING YOU OUT. Just seems like one of those “i’m not into change” people, which clearly shows because you didn’t have enough change to pay pyro. smh
@norbauer you are a class act, an attribute you share with your cases. Thanks for your transparency and eloquent well thought out responses, long may they continue.
@spacewolfplays are you kidding about the functionality? From a front end/layman’s perspective all I’ve seen is a streamlined, responsive experience on both mobile and desktop. It far surpasses the functionality and UX of a simple machines forum and does not have some of the inherant drawbacks of Reddit.
