Special User Sections > Site/Forum Features

Discussion: How can we Improve DonationCoder?

<< < (8/18) > >>

JavaJones:
Miles (and others previously), great point about the word "Donation" and the name of the site.

I'll be honest, I've always been a bit dubious about that name too. For one thing the site isn't necessarily (in practice) that much "about" (or affected by?) the whole donation model, though it is well implemented here in the forums and hopefully used with good frequency. But in some sense you could think of it as just a part of the system here, not necessarily the *point* of it. Just like other forums may have a "Karma" system or similar, but they're not called "Karmatown". That may not be a fair analogy though as the intention *here* may actually be that the donation model does take more of a front-seat than other similar systems on other sites. That being said, it's a question whether A: that approach is actually most beneficial to promotion of donationware as a concept, and B: whether it's still relevant as a core aspect of where the site has evolved to.

The reason I haven't been more vocal about all this before though is my understanding is mouser founded the site with this model in mind, and with the intention of promoting it and trying to make it successful. So some promotion of that approach is perhaps implicit in the "mission", even if unstated. But as I alluded to above, the idea of direct promotion of the donationware model, particularly through naming, may not actually be as beneficial to the concept as we might like. In fact, often times *not* calling attention to a controversial concept, and simply demonstrating its efficacy, will have better results. So that would be exemplified here by e.g. renaming the site to "SoftwareSnacks.com", and having donationware as just part of the encouraged model, with the same systems we have now, just not trying to *focus* on the donation aspect (as indeed for all practical purposes we already do not, but the name perhaps betrays that reality). Then people would come to the site, use the software, go through the same processes, and if they found the software good, and the process for registering and using it is not onerous, they might automatically have their perspective on a "donation" model changed, at least a bit. It's purely by positive demonstration of the model, rather than outright advertisement of it.

I realize the idea of changing the name of the site is huge and has large repercussions, but I have to be honest, it's something that has always bugged me a bit (and not because I don't support the donationware concept!), and I think it *does* affect the initial impression for many users.

At the same time I don't think a name change necessarily addresses many of the other concerns here. It's really just *another* concern that needs consideration I think. It's not going to make content easier to find or more relevant or organized or anything.

- Oshyan

rjbull:
there was a big thread about it months/years ago I never even noticed.-MilesAhead (April 26, 2010, 02:46 PM)
--- End quote ---

DC has over 20,000 topics and over 200,000 each of total posts and members.  I don't think anybody can keep up with all of it in detail any more, and it can scarcely help being a broad church.  I fairly often click on Show latest topics to see what's new, besides skimming the newsletter.  And I hope nobody stridently wants things that would need to be implemented by hard-pressed time-poor volunteers.  For one, mouser is supposed to be working on his *P*h*.D*.

mouser:
Regarding the points about the site name..

When I first set up the site, the idea was to see if enough people would be willing to donate to support the development of my software, enough to let me continue developing it.  Truth be told, i didn't have high hopes that the site would survive very long.

What happened is that the site has evolved because of the amazing people that have decided to make it their home.

The name of the site doesn't perfectly match what the site is anymore.. But i'm not sure it's practical to change it.. Names have a way of gaining emotional traction and momentum, and changing the name would cause all kinds of havok and confusion.

MilesAhead:
My note about the "donation deterrent effect" wasn't meant to suggest changing the name of the site.  That would kill off any publicity the software associated with it has earned.  I don't know the solution.  Maybe some concise explanation of what people can expect, that could be linked to, would be helpful.

The Coding Snacks board is kind of novel and should be touted a bit more I think.  But one problem is there's a bit of a tongue in cheek quality that's hard to transplant when telling people about it other places. They think you are trying to get them to contract custom software or something like that(spam paranoia again.)  It's just difficult to know how to capsulize why people should visit and look for software and a novel board.

MilesAhead:
there was a big thread about it months/years ago I never even noticed.-MilesAhead (April 26, 2010, 02:46 PM)
--- End quote ---

DC has over 20,000 topics and over 200,000 each of total posts and members.  I don't think anybody can keep up with all of it in detail any more, and it can scarcely help being a broad church.  I fairly often click on Show latest topics to see what's new, besides skimming the newsletter.  And I hope nobody stridently wants things that would need to be implemented by hard-pressed time-poor volunteers.  For one, mouser is supposed to be working on his *P*h*.D*.
-rjbull (April 26, 2010, 03:24 PM)
--- End quote ---

I'm not suggesting chaining anyone to the grinding wheel.  There must be some intermittent problem or something with search.  Seems I remember looking around to avoid duplicating posts already done only to be made aware later with the link.  Granted I may just not have searched correctly but it seems like it happens often enough to discount operator error.

In the particular case of the browser it could be that it came to my notice and I dismissed it because I was so into Firefox at the time.  But I just get the impression some things that should pop up in result lists often don't.

Could be just an impression.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page