tofro wrote:I see it a bit like you, VP - enthusiasm needs to be honored with fun. As soon as it's no longer fun, enthusiasm tends to fade.
And: The risk of one individual vanishing from the scene (for whatever reason) can be mitigated by having resilience - mirrors, back-ups, the like.
Tobias
I agree - QLing is about fun, enthusiasm and enjoying whatever use you make of your QLs. Some people like to be at the heart of things (as I do, having edited one magazine and new editor for another, along with having been a software publisher and author). Without an "enthusiast" like vanpeebles, we may never have got QL Forum. Personally, I wouldn't want to be too much part of an organisaton that was too commercial (been there, didn't enjoy that).
RWAP wrote:
The problem is that with constantly changing sites such as the QL Wiki, the forums and even to the QL Homepage - these do not currently have any mirrors or even up to date backups. What happens to the domain names too?
In mycase, domain names have to be renewed every two years. There is no up-to-date backup apart from that which the ISP provides and the backups I keep here. Phoebus Dokos did mirror my site some years ago, but not recently. I'd certainly be happy to work with someone to create mirrors of the sites, assuming they could be made to automatically stay up to date.
RWAP wrote:
So far as I can see the amount of enthusiasm for the QL Wiki and Facebook pages is minimal - no-one has even suggested they are happy to take those over. Do we just give up on them and let them lapse or is there a group of individuals who are willing to take them over (and accept that most people will expect them to do all the updating)?
There is not even a proper domain name for the QL Wiki !!
Do you have stats for useage of the Wiki? I can well believe the lack of volunteers to update it, after all you may be able to count on the fingers of one hand those who have the knowledge of all the software and QL systems coupled with the willingness. I'm pretty sure the QL Wiki gets read and used a lot, just nobody interested in /time on their hands updating it.
RWAP wrote:
Similar issues apply to the Quanta website and even the Github - the Quanta membership have failed to offer support to the webmaster and so most of the site has never been finished (or implemented) - updates of news items are left to Dilwyn....
...who was uanble to do so last year because of the family issues. That has now been addressed - as the Editor and I prepare the magazine, we send stuff to the webmaster to put on the website instead of trying to make time to sort it out later - shares the workload.
RWAP wrote:There are other reasons why it might make sense to have an incorporated body responsible for these - perhaps if people were actually paid to do work, then that might get more enthusiasm.
This late in the life of the QL, I'm not in favour of "payment" as such, although reimbursement of costs incurred (mileage, telephone, broadband, postage etc etc). In many ways it depends on the workload and amounts involved, if the body makes money it becomes easier to do this, say pay somebody so many hours a week to keep things up to date. The "incorporated body" would be able to decide on things like this, although I'd be wary of getting somebody who might do it for the money, not for the enthusiasm for QL/ZX80/whatever.
RWAP wrote:Dilwyn can comment himself on the QL Homepage, but again there, any updates are sent to him to be added, and there is general criticism of the lack of QL software for download (despite the 100s of titles if not 1000s on the site) - when those people are pointed to the site to download software, all you get is moaning that there are no screenshots and only minimal information on each software title (much the same as happens with the QL Wiki).
In an ideal world, Rich...
Personally I'm just sad there's no more than 48 hours in each day