12/1/07  More thoughts and Some Players -- Jim B.

       It was my intention that we, anyone interested in this subject, (and this subject alone) might benefit from using the wiki to add thoughts as they occur and as a "brainstorming" utility.  As we firm up some of the ideas that we are discussing, we can easily copy the agreed-upon text to a Word document or a *.pdf and circulate it for comment, markup and forming a basis for discussion.  I suspect that there will be people who will want to hang onto the "contest" concept for a while... that really doesn't bother me.  If we can develop a resource, some "standards" or even some simplified formatting methods, I think that would be great.  (In fact, we can create a power point presentation of any or all of this at the bottom of this page!)    

       Okay, my real reason for adding some notes is that we, you and I, have suggested several people that might be interested in the project and I've started a list of those and some others.  They are listed here.  I've also signed up for unlimited usage of WebEx for the next three months and am in process of setting that up.  So I look forward to being able to have semi-regular net meetings on this issue.  I currently use VOIP and have "free" long distance telephone calling for USA, Canada, and Europe.  So, let me know if you ever want some "face" time and I'll try to arrange it.

       Potential colleagues:     Sam Wexler, Melvin Weekley, Judy Taylour, Mike Lyons, Linda Gonse, Don Singleton, Irene Kraus, Barbara Manning, Jim Bragonier, Jack Linder, Mike Morris (last three of our club).   Additional Prospects:  George Skarbek, (Past Melbourne UG President). 

       (add all that you'd like...  it is easier for people to opt-out...)

       From my group dynamics experience, I've learned that people don't like to make open ended commitments.  If proposed members can help define the Mission, Goals, and Strategies, then they may wish to have others carry out the specific actions and activities to implement the project.  Coordination of the first event and maintenance of the processes are things that I'm not very good at, but realize they're essential to the long-term success of the program.   Don't hesitate to massage any of the text that you see here.  -- Jim B.

 Barbara,

       Wow, you're a mental giant!  I think that you've described a terrific idea and I think that there are several ways to achieve some penetrating evaluations of sites to consider from group members (and possibly from some groups who are not, which I'll explain in a moment).

       One of the Denver UGs contacted us to see if we would be interested in a gathering of Colorado "webmasters" to share what we're trying to accomplish with our respective sites.  I responded with a "half-assed" statement that we couldn't keep up with all the do-dads, flash animated cartoons, and garrish colors on the Denver Club's site, but that we'd be interested in visiting with them, and I invited them to one of our meetings on our website use.  I guess that I hurt their feelings.  I haven't heard anything further from them.  You've responded in an all-together different manner, and I'm very impressed by your willingness to explore another approach to the website event in future year(s).

       What I was concerned about in your basic criteria of the entry form was the publishing of officers and access to their email addresses.  We do this, but it is buried in the k-Byte Newsletter, our monthly on-line publication, and there the email addresses do not use the @ sign but rather a substitution of james.bragonier(at)comcast.net  so that it is not as easily harvested by robots.  Three of the officers receive the Contact@frpcug.org email and respond as we have with you to email directed to that address.   It seems to work well, but doesn't meet your "basic criteria," and for good reasons.  There must be many other sites that have comparable idiosyncrasies that are well reasoned.  I'm not about to change ours, and almost didn't sign up for that reason... and we wouldn't have had this conversation.  I very much value this exchange, and I now see that you've seen some value in it as well.  Thank you!

       There are so many ways to hold a cyber meeting, that I wonder if it is worth trying to do this at a convention.  I would be willing to try to help block out a revised "Web Fair" in the spirit of the County Fairs of the Great Midwest, and try to find a way for us to elicit statements from webmasters submitted as a self-evaluation about 1) What are the elements of their sites that they think are important, 2) How they arrived at those elements, and 3) How well they feel they have achieve their goals in displaying those elements, 4) What limitations and constraints exist to achieving more of their goals on their websites, and 5) what they need to know to achieve a more appealing presentation, broader informational offerings, greater use by their members, and, perhaps, draw more active members to the site, and subsequently to their clubs.  Authors would be asked to rank on a scale of 1-5, how well do they feel that they have met their goals.  How committed are they to continued improvement of their sites?  This could be their self evaluation.

       By submitting this type statement to a panel of website developers, a ranking of sites on how well they have met their own goals, their future intentions, the "better" achieving sites should percolate upward.  Then a subjective evaluation by the panel of the webmasters, using the developers' criteria above, and their own judgement,  should be possible.  A table of "judges comments" could be posted on the APCUG site to accompany the Blue, Red and White ribbons won by the sites.  Posting a Winners Circle Ribbon on the Clubs' web sites should be the prize.  I would hope that some generalized constructive criticism could be made of other sites by the webmasters panel.  These may, or may not all have the same criteria, but some are better meeting their own stated goals than others, and can be recognized in a special listing.  I really think that all sites should be viewed for study and comment...  The particular sites selected among the best would be made public, but criticisms could be generalized and not point at particular sites, unless the authors of those sites are willing to have the criticisms made public.  Judging websites on their own criteria seems to be ultimately fair... and can open the dialog for learning from one another at all levels of the competition.  At the fair the best bull is selected by a combination of objective and subjective criteria, non of which diminishes the other animal, it just place the better animals on a lower pedestal. 

       One of the things that I think is weak about our FRPCUG site is the lack of annotated photos.  This is a criticism I'd venture about APCUG's site, too.  The Greeley UG is quite the opposite.  Lots of pictures and not much  written "content."  Somewhere there is a happy medium, but I don't know where that is, yet.  Too, we are trying to develop a "members only" part of the site with a listing of the specials offered to APCUG members and local retail and service providers in our "partner" class of members.  We have just purchased a security certificate for a secured section of our site.  I don't know others that are doing this, though one of the Denver clubs does it.

       So, yes, I and, I think, some of my friends would be happy to help talk about remodeling the contest into something more engaging of more UG and something more in keeping with the "Users helping users" motto that means so much to active members... and validates our 501c3 tax status!  I don't know how unique that status is to us, but it is very important motivator for much of our educational offerings.

       I'm a sole proprietor of Colorado Music Company, Bragonier Architects, LLC, and I have an ailing wife whom I do not leave for several days at a time.  Therefore it is not likely that I'll be coming to the convention in Las Vegas.  I do participate in Web Casts and WebEx presentations nearly every month, so I'd encourage us to think about that possibility.

        I suggest that we put this on a Wiki such as PBwiki (Peanut Butter Wiki) and try to boil it down to a game plan and selected players...  We have a wiki at http://www.frpcug.pbwiki.com/.   Click on the "Sidebar" on the far right side of the page and proceed down the sidebar to the APCUG WebPage Contest  to get to the discussion that we're having.

        Let me know if you think that this is viable or has advantages over the exchange of emails on a continuing basis.

        Thanks, this is stimulating.    Jim Bragonier  

Barbara Manning wrote:

Hmmmm.  Now you have my attention. 

 

I hadn't considered the contest as an educational effort at all.  I saw it like you call it -- while not quite a battle of gladiators, at least people vying for the same piece of the pie.  It's probably my background in the ad agency that assumes the competitiveness (where competition is cut throat), although we do call it a competition.

 

So.  You're suggesting that the "contest" be completely overhauled so that it can be used as ahhhhhhh, a template? For good basic web design? For the basic data that needs to be on a UG site? for use as a educational  tool for the UG's to get their basics on?

 

What you are saying is rather than have a contest that judges on the basics (which is what we have now), what we should strive for is a ummmmm, "e-journey" where the all the entrants are, (for example) rather than judged on the criteria; self judge on say, a higher, more specific level of criteria. And the APCUG creates a blog type of space (personally I hate blogs -- I think they are overused, used incorrectly and over rated. Having said that I do have one.), where the entrants could say, discuss why they chose this software over that, and this host over that, and this crm soft over that.

 

This works for me.  And, I like it a lot more than I like "judging" the sites base on a set of basic criteria.  Having been a judge for English-language print ad work done in Japan, I know how sticky some of the rules can be.  I also like the educational aspects of it. It appeals to the educator in me and I'm sure it will appeal to the UG's since they is a great outpouring of requests to help with the basics of, well with the basics of everything.

 

All righty.  With apologies, there is nothing that can be done to change the judging criteria for this year's contest, but if you or someone from your UG is willing to work with me and Lori Berenson, my co-chair to revamp the web contest for next year, I'm up for that. 

 

We can use the WebBoard to document the issues, (or something else).  It would be a way to involve the membership in the process (again we could use the APCUG website to facilitate) and in the end, we'd have a more relevant contest (perhaps not better, but more relevant).

 

You'll be pleased to know that you are not alone.  Mike Lyons from the Orange County IBM PC UG  also questions the contests validity, judging criteria and management -- to the point where his UG has opted out.

 

Well, well, well.  This is a nice juicy problem that needs attention.  I can't do it alone, but I'm prepared to work with a team to make the website competition educational, egalitarian, and provide essential information to our UG's.  I can't do it alone -- would you or someone from your UG be willing to work with me?  Mel Weekly who's been copied on these memos is also your Regional Advisor, so that's a good sign.  I can also try to coerce someone from the Orange County UG to participate..

 

Let me know your thoughts.

 

Cheers,

Barbara

 

PS I'm not signed up to go to the apcug convention in LV in Jan, but the forces of nature are co-joined against me.  I'll be in the US in Jan and might end up there because my only living Aunt lives in Boulder City NV and I might as well go.  If your considering it (you're just a state away, so to speak), we can meet there and begin the process.

 

At 06 10 2007 12:02, Jim Bragonier wrote:

 

Barbara,

       Thank you for your reasoned response.  You put quite a bit of time in the process.  Thank you for taking my inquiry so seriously.  I think that you missed my point, however.  If the "contest" were a battle to the death of the contestants, then, I'd agree that the contestants should not be drafted into the arena.  This is an educational effort on the part of the Association, however, not a battle of gladiators.  What is being stressed in the submission form is that there is a certain minimum of information that should be on all club websites, and an evaluation of websites helps upgrade the quality of all websites, giving ranked recognition to those which, in somebody's opinion, gives the best information in a logical, graphically, perhaps innovative, pleasing way.  This is not a beauty contest, though it could be.  It is an exercise that evaluates the websites of people who have chosen to have a "public" face on a internet website.  These are not meant to be personal, nor are they IQ tests, nor are we giving away secrets that a club, wishing to remain "private," does not want to be public.  (The members-only portion of our site, you'll not be judging, for example.)

 

So, I respectfully disagree with nearly all the discussion points that you presented.  Your entrance form requires that a club request the evaluation of the contest.  But, I would guess that there are a number of clubs with high quality websites that won't be submitted and will receive no recognition and no instructional value will be gleaned from them, regarding website design.  This will be a loss to the membership.

 

Recognition of a job well done has never been viewed as unwanted attention in my experience.  (Clearly, I do not see this as a meat market/beauty contest or service in the military for which one is drafted...)

 

Thanks for your response and notification of our having entered the contest, and your thoughtful discussion.

 

Jim Bragonier

 

 

 

 

 

Barbara Manning wrote:

 

Dear Jim and Rick,

 

First, please accept my apology for not confirming receipt of your entrant.  I had good intentions, but lacked the follow through.  I've already started an online file for the 2008 contest organizers, and will make sure that acknowledgement of an entry is included in next year's online form.  If you'd like to make a contribution to it, go to the APCUG site, click on Web Site, slide to Web Board, click and follow the directions to a Board called  APCUG Website Contest.  You can enter as a guest to read.  If you want to post, you'll have to sign up.  It should be relatively easy to return an auto acknowledgement that the entry has been received.  Your entry was recorded on Sept 26 -- one of the earlier entries.  Again, I'm very sorry that this simple courtesy was overlooked.

 

As for your second question, why, indeed.  At first blush, it seems logical for us to automatically enter all 290 membership websites in the contest.  But as I think about it, it may be logical, but perhaps it's also a bit impertinent. 

 

After all, the nature of any contest is that it's competitive, and many of our clubs are less concerned about "how they stack up against the competition" and more concerned about how they stack up against their membership.  I certainly would not want to be automatically entered into a beauty contest, or a landscaping contest, or any contest whatsoever, in fact, and probably neither do the UG's that elected not to enter.  There are many other reasons why a UG may elect not to enter their website in the contest, I'm sure you can think of a few.

 

A quick check through the current member list shows 16 UG's that did not list a website -- about 5% of the total.  In my region, there's one group that doesn't have a website.  They get along fine with meetings, newsletters, Special Interest Groups and parties, chat and email.  If we automatically entered all the member UG's are we saying that you can not be a PCUG if you don't have a website?  That may be a stretch, but I personally don't think it's appropriate to hold a contest for everyone when everyone can't participate.

 

As a direct marketer, I know that getting people to self-select -- getting them to raise their hand and agree to do something, even something as small as fill out a form -- is better than drafting them into service, and intuitively you know that as well.  Why else would there be such concern about getting volunteers of all stripes?

 

Still, I've just explained my personal opinion and this isn't the Barbara Manning UG Association, so I'll bring it up to the Board of Directors and let them decide.

 

Thanks again for entering the contest and for delivering such thought provoking questions.

Barbara Manning

APCUG International Advisor

Australia, Canada and Japan

bmanning@apcug.net

Skype: Mensh11

816-872-4767

 

 

At 06 10 2007 03:32, Jim Bragonier wrote:

 

How do we know if we are entered?  I filled out the form, but there was no indication that it had been received or recorded.

 

Why isn't membership enough to have a website considered for the contest??  Shouldn't APCUG membership alone qualify all clubs?

 

Jim Bragonier, Secretary

Front Range PC Users Group (FRPCUG)

http://www.frpcug.org

 

-------- Original Message --------

From: - Sat Oct 06 02:26:09 2007

X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

X-Mozilla-Status2: 00800000

Message-ID: <4707469F.6060404@comcast.net>

Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 02:26:07 -0600

From: Jim Bragonier <james.bragonier@comcast.net>

Reply-To: james.bragonier@comcast.net

Organization: Bragonier Architects, LLC

User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060516)

MIME-Version: 1.0

To: RICK MATTINGLY <rickmatt@q.com>, Barbara Manning <info@apcug.org>

Subject: Re: FW: Last Call to enter the APCUG Website Contest -- deadline is Oct. 15

References: <E1IdqZd-0007xC-HH@smtp02.dentaku.gol.com> <BAY143-W209EF35AF48D5842A050E1DBA90@phx.gbl>

In-Reply-To: <BAY143-W209EF35AF48D5842A050E1DBA90@phx.gbl>

Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080304080808030902050600"

 

 

Rick,

 

I think that I already submitted our information for this, though I received no conformation that they have received it... Will we have more chance to win if we send our contest submission multiple times, do ya think?

 

I'll try to see what they are needing, but why don't they review all member websites automatically???  They already have the database.  I'll ask them, in fact, I'll copy this email to them.  Whoopee, handling complex transaction buy the click of a mouse!   It's revolutionary.

 

Jim Bragonier, Secretary

Front Range PC Users Group

http://www.frpcug.org

 

 

 

RICK MATTINGLY (FRPCUG president) wrote:

 

For your consideration.

 

Rick Mattingly

 

 

---

Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 12:00:56 -0500

To: wijames@sbcglobal.net; lorib@berenson.net

From: barbaram@gol.com

Subject: Last Call to enter the APCUG Website Contest -- deadline is Oct. 15

 

 

LAST CALL!

Enter your site in the APCUG Website Contest in the next 10 days!

 

 

You have nothing to lose and lots to gain by entering your website in the contest

-- there is no entry fee, after all.

 

Just fill out this form: http://www.apcug.net/2007contest/website_form.htm

 That's all there is to it.  FAST, EASY, FUN and Worthwhile