Page 2 of 2

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:32 pm
by aebrown
eblood66 wrote:Although this sounds great, based on the forum where this was posted, I think the OP was talking about the new Meetinghouse Technology site that is going to replace the information on the wiki. I think he was looking for some way to let the community continue to help make sure it stays up to date and useful.

I wouldn't think you would need a full beta test process for documentation updates.


Actually, this change is much more than a "new Meetinghouse Technology site." The bulk of the clerk-related materials on the LDSTech wiki are also moving, and access to some parts of the site will be controlled by standard callings related to the member's LDS Account.

Since people with different callings will have access to different sections, it will be helpful to have people with several different roles to participate in the beta.

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 7:01 pm
by PartridgeRM
Essentially that's how our page will work. It will allow a user to make a request. If it is a first time user, then we'll contact the stake president and let him choose to participate. If they do, and someone else from that stake tries to sign up, they'll be told the stake is already participating. If the stake president chooses not to participate, then we'll also notify any user that tries to register. We hope to make it easy to make the request, but also informative. As this is yet to be built and still in the design phase though, I appreciate all the good feedback here.

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 7:04 pm
by PartridgeRM
eblood66 wrote:I think the OP was talking about the new Meetinghouse Technology site that is going to replace the information on the wiki


I misunderstood then. My apologies.

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 7:23 pm
by aebrown
PartridgeRM wrote:
eblood66 wrote:I think the OP was talking about the new Meetinghouse Technology site that is going to replace the information on the wiki


I misunderstood then. My apologies.


No, I don't think you misunderstood -- as near as I can tell, you are talking about the same thing as the OP, which referred to the upcoming "clerk and technology" site -- far more than just Meetinghouse Technology.

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:47 pm
by jonesrk
aebrown wrote:So how would you like people to make these requests? Should they send you a PM? Or reply to this thread? I'm sure you can look up what stake we're in based on our LDS Account username, but would you like any information besides the username?


PartridgeRM wrote:It is probably best to reply to this thread for now. I'm subscribed to it so I'll get notified right away.

Please provide your ward/branch name and your stake/district name, and your name if you'd like to participate. I will then add you to our beta list and contact your stake president to confirm he is comfortable participating in the beta.


PartridgeRM,

If you want to have people just reply to this thread you will then have there LDSAccount and you should be able to look them up easily and see there calling and units.

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:36 pm
by jdlessley
aebrown wrote:No, I don't think you misunderstood -- as near as I can tell, you are talking about the same thing as the OP, which referred to the upcoming "clerk and technology" site -- far more than just Meetinghouse Technology.
I think there is misunderstanding by both eblood66 and PartridgeRM. eblood66 is missing the part of the project that involves two reasons/aspects for the move that hutchinsbb mentioned in his post in the MHT Project - Moving Meetinghouse Technology Content to LDS.org thread:
hutchinsbb wrote:
  • Secure sensitive content with role-based authentication
  • Integrate content with LDS.org personalization effort (displaying information related to your Church calling on the home page).

These two aspects of the move, and possibly others, to the new site may need some testing.

I think eblood66 was only looking at the aspect of the move that dwsmith2 was asking about in his opening post. That aspect is some community input to the information content that is going to be moved. I don't think PartridgeRM has answered that question of dwsmith2's opening post.

dwsmith2's concern is once the content is moved, the community will have no input to that content. He is asking for a compromise between a wiki format and a traditional website format where information flow is one-way, from website owner/creator to website users. The feedback on LDS.org (Allegiance) is nortorious as a black hole where feedback is submitted and the submitter either never gets a response or gets an automated and cryptic "Thank you for your input", but nothing else, several weeks or even months later.

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:02 am
by eblood66
jdlessley wrote:I think eblood66 was only looking at the aspect of the move that dwsmith2 was asking about in his opening post. That aspect is some community input to the information content that is going to be moved. I don't think PartridgeRM has answered that question of dwsmith2's opening post.

dwsmith2's concern is once the content is moved, the community will have no input to that content. He is asking for a compromise between a wiki format and a traditional website format where information flow is one-way, from website owner/creator to website users. The feedback on LDS.org (Allegiance) is nortorious as a black hole where feedback is submitted and the submitter either never gets a response or gets an automated and cryptic "Thank you for your input", but nothing else, several weeks or even months later.


Actually, I wasn't speaking against any of what PartridgeRM has proposed or whether the new site needs beta testing. It does sound great. I was merely trying to get back to dwsmith2's original point (which you expressed here better than I did). When I said it doesn't need beta testing, I was merely talking about the kind of documentation edits that are likely to be suggested by the community. At least, I would hope that documentation changes and clarifications could be made quickly when issues come up on the forums or from support lines. That would be less likely if all of them have to go through a beta test cycle.

Having said that, I realize that changes will likely be delayed no matter what by translation requirements (also one of the reasons for the change from the wiki). There's not a lot that can be done about that. It just takes time to get even small things translated.

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:39 am
by eblood66
aebrown wrote:No, I don't think you misunderstood -- as near as I can tell, you are talking about the same thing as the OP, which referred to the upcoming "clerk and technology" site -- far more than just Meetinghouse Technology.


Actually, looking at it closer I'm wondering whether there is a misunderstanding or not. I know that PartridgeRM works on the existing Clerk (and Leader) Resources site (online MLS). It's quite possible he's also working on the new Clerk and Technology Training Library (to use one of the terms suggested in another thread).

PartridgeRM, could you clarify whether you're talking about http://clerks.lds.org, the new training site or both. Or is the new training site really an extension of the existing Clerks Resources (http://clerks.lds.org)?

Whichever is the case, it's great to hear about efforts to improve the feedback we can give.