10 Responses to “One Point of Origin”

1. Scott Reynen Says:
   November 24th, 2007 at 12:50 am

   I found the Google group first, and for a while had no idea this website existed. There’s also the newsletter and assorted accounts elsewhere. I’d also like to see this consolidated more. And to whatever extent multiple sites are maintained, we should clarify the intended purpose of each.

2. Matthew Says:
   November 24th, 2007 at 1:46 am

   I think it stands to reason that this site (refreshdenver.org) would serve to be the “single point of origin” or at least the starting point. I would agree with you in that the “extra stuff” could cause confusion but at the same time it’s in our best interest as a group to reach in as many directions as we can to “get in touch” with the designers and developers of our metro areas. I think it obvious from Scott’s comment that what we’ve done thus far isn’t the best approach but at the same time it’s also working for us.

   As for the “multiply sites,” there really is only the two — I just don’t think everyone understands how to use them correctly. The main site, this one, is for postings of a one-way nature (i.e., information in the form of articles, announcements, etc.) and the google group is meant for discussions (a forum) [side note: just like this one, which really should have been posted in the forum]. Both serve a purpose and both have limitations. As we grow and gain time as well as resources we will do everything we can to “clarify the message.” However, it’s only natural for a site to go through such “growing pains”. In fact, Chip and I had no idea that this would even work, I guess in a sense we’re lucky to have such a “charged” chapter. Just so you know, we’ve been talking to other Refresh Cities and it turns out that no other refresh has grown this much this fast.

   So in the mean time, there are other sites we do use (e.g., upcoming, flickr, twitter, etc.) and these are only to serve as supporting roles to our main goal — build a solid chapter. I’m sure we could code similar and custom solutions into the main site and I’m sure we will at some point in the future, but you have to remember we’re just getting started.

   Thanks for the feedback.

3. Brooke Kuhlmann Says:
   November 24th, 2007 at 7:30 am

   Fair enough. Lets see how this plays out.

4. Scott Reynen Says:
   November 24th, 2007 at 11:38 am

   I think treating this site as one-way communication is a big mistake. It makes the public face of Refresh Denver appear to be entirely at odds with the stated purposes of promoting discussion and an active community. And it’s also simply not how discussion works. If someone has something to say about a post here, they’ll discuss it here. There’s no way to know in advance if something is going to be one-way or two-way communication. If there’s really a need for the email list at all (which I question), I think a better distinction would be public vs. pseudo-private discussion. But we should be encouraging discussion wherever people want to have it.

5. Mike Says:
   November 26th, 2007 at 10:17 am

   I think we need some more information before we decide what to do.

   Please go to http://votemonkey.com/poll/1123 and tell us how you found out about the group.

   Here’s my experience:

   I just moved into the area in early September. I searched meetup.com and the groups.google.com for local group meetings I might be interested in. I was familiar withe Refresh Phoenix, so I used that as a key word. I would not have found Refresh Denver without the google group.

   I think my experience is fairly common.

   Like everyone else, I’m busy, so, while I’m vitally interested in Refresh, I feel strongly that it needs to be a low overhead operation.

   In that regard:
   - I don’t really care about refreshments - although I would bring something if it were ‘understood’ that we should do that.
   - I’m not all that interested in the Web site until I get clear what it’s role is
   - I think archives are ‘good’, but overrated. Most of the ones I’ve seen are like somebody’s old attic. The best archives are very selective about what they have in them.
   - I very much like the summary and wrap-ups.
   - I think the google group can provide most of the infrastructure we need with the Discussions, Pages, and Files sections and will be seen by more people than the web site.

   That being said, I still feel there should be a web site - but I don’t know what value add it has to compensate for the effort required.

6. Mike Says:
   November 26th, 2007 at 10:19 am

   I think we need to know a little more about how people find Refresh Denver before making any decisions.

   I put up a poll at: http://votemonkey.com/poll/1123 - please check it out.

   BTW: I fell strongly that Refresh should be a low maintenance organization and that google groups has most of the infrastructure we need.

   That said, I like the idea of a web site, but don’t know what we should use it for.

   thanks

7. Matthew Says:
   November 26th, 2007 at 10:34 am

   Scott,

   Answer this, is posting an announcement for a meeting/gathering or a posting for an industry article one way? I think so, or at least that is it’s intension seeing how by nature the application is a weblog (blog). However, there can be limited discussion about that posting, to a degree, in the comments section. But at the end of the day comments are just that, comment about the posting.

   Whereas, a discussion — whether it’s about new ideas, new projects, this topic, about the group or website, etc., would be more appropriate in a true FORUM. A Blog is not a Forum is a BLOG. Make sense?

8. Julie Says:
   November 26th, 2007 at 10:51 am

   Matt,

   Could we consolidate the content types to a single location, then? While it’s nice that there’s myriad other websites that can each handle a specific aspect of community involvement and interaction, it would be easier to go to a single place for everything. If the forum could live somewhere at refreshdenver.org, it would be more logical (for me, anyway) than having *just* the blog here, then going to another place to actually discuss something, and one more to post some pictures, and still another to reply to a meeting invitation, and one more to view the presentation given at the meeting, et. al. I know there are some specific functions that other sites might be better at handling, but that’s outweighed (again, it might just be for me) by the convenience of everything being in one place.

9. Scott Reynen Says:
   November 26th, 2007 at 4:59 pm

   “Answer this, is posting an announcement for a meeting/gathering or a posting for an industry article one way?”

   Like everything else, I’d say it depends. Most of the meeting announcements on the email list have at least one response, either asking for or offering additional information. I don’t see any reason not to move that kind of exchange to a more public forum where more people will likely see it.

   I don’t see any meaningful distinction between “blog” and “forum.” I’m commenting on another comment right now, not the original post. That this conversation is happening in two places underscores there’s some redundancy. In theory refreshdenver.org and the Google group may serve two different purposes, but in practice they don’t seem to be doing that.

10. Brooke Kuhlmann Says:
    November 26th, 2007 at 6:02 pm

    Mathew, I’m afraid a post is only one-way when you do not allow commenting. With commenting turned on, you can potentially have as much traction as a forum. Also, don’t forget that the WordPress plugin mechanism is rather powerful and can be used to enhance the comments in such a way that they could be threaded. For example: Brian’s Threaded Comments.

    Scott, I agree. The line begins to blur between blogs and forums especially when commenting is turned on for blogs.

    Mike/Julie, you are correct. I also think that Refresh Denver should be low maintenance and easy for others to follow along. I would definitely like to see all Refresh Denver-related news centralized and located in one place. Especially since this site could potentially do everything that Google Groups does. Not to mention lots of customization with themes as well as tag clouds and categories for those who want to customize their feeds.

Leave a Reply