From johncumbers at gmail.com Tue Feb 5 16:11:38 2008 From: johncumbers at gmail.com (John Cumbers) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:11:38 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Publishing Teleconference will be at 11am tomorrow, Wed, EST, please call USA +1 617 324 7374 to take part. Agenda attached. Message-ID: Hi all, re: http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/03/what-would-be-your-top-5-priorities-from-a-new-style-publishing-system/#comment-5 For all those interested OWW publishing teleconference will be at 11am tomorrow, Wed, EST, please call USA +1 617 324 7374 to take part. Agenda will be: 1) What does the community need as far as a publishing channel? What are the key requirements. 2) is this met elsewhere, why/why not? 3) should we set something up, what would be the scope? 4) would we want to involve third parties, if so how? who? 5) Logistics and time-line 6) What to report to steering committee, and date of next meeting Please mail me to change agenda items, Cheers, John -- John Cumbers, Graduate Student Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry Biology and Medicine Brown University, Box G-W Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080205/92a43ba9/attachment.htm From johncumbers at gmail.com Fri Feb 8 10:16:06 2008 From: johncumbers at gmail.com (John Cumbers) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:16:06 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] I'm just launching into some updated reading for an old project and I'm looking at a better way to collect my notes together... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: HI all, Sorry for the delay in sending this out, but thanks to all the tips for ways to collect references and notes on-line, below are some recommendations from people, cheers, John *www.zotero.org * >> From Ricardo: John says: I'd looked at this Firefox plug-in before, but didn't think much of it, but it has had significant updates recently, watch the intro screen cast to see the features. Just like endnote for keeping ref's but also allows you to easy grab any web page and store it locally, even annotate it with stickies. This is the one that I've gone with. It almost has too many features and is not that intuitive to use, but great support if you need help. Evernote.com below looks awesome too and I may try it for a lab notebook, particularly the search images function and the ability to scan in hand written notes. Drawback; you have to pay to use it. * http://www.evernote.com). * >>Angela: ""I've just started to use a note-taking program called Evernote. You can download a trial from this site (http://www.evernote.com). It's on special offer until January 15, 2008 (?19.95). So far I'm really happy with it. You can type notes directly into it. Drag and drop web clippings, excel and word files, image files. You can also scan in images and docs - great for those scrappy pieces of paper I write things down on! (I haven't tested this yet though). It has a very good search facility - even finding text in images. It can be installed on a home and work computer and you can synchronize between computers using a usb thumb drive. It also has a portable version which you can use on PCs that don't have the program installed. See the links below for user stories from the user forum ( http://forum.evernote.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=4990 ). There are a few that might give you ideas for setting up a system that works for you. *A few others: * http://www.citavi.com/de/allgemeines/english.html google notebook TWiki ( personal wiki available for Mac and Win) and JabRef - -- John Cumbers, Graduate Student Biology and Medicine Brown University, Box G-W Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 On Jan 5, 2008 6:04 PM, John Cumbers wrote: > Hi all, > So I'm halfway through my PhD and I'm just launching into some updated > reading for an old project and I'm looking at a better way to collect my > notes together. I'm hoping that there is a great new tool available that > someone can tell me about to make my life easier... or at least a better > strategy that someone has found to do this sort of research by... > > I want something to collect notes from meetings with my supervisor, > experiments I plan to do, notes from reading, diagrams, references. Ideally > something that would show me a list of notes I've taken, in chronological > order and also searchable via tags. > > *Here are a few strategies that have not worked that well in the past. > *Find papers via pubmed/hubmed/scholar > add papers to citeulike, many never end up getting read. > print out a few key pdf's on paper > go through these, make notes on the paper itself, make notes on scratch > paper > Write up key things on more scratch paper. > File some of the PDF's via citeulike ID number in filing cabinet... never > to be looked at again.. get on with lab work > or... create stack of unsortable papers, get on with lab work > Lose papers in mass of other papers. lose notes. > repeat. > > Next best thing might be a paper notebook like a lab book. But this gets > equally as messy, although I could repeat this with an index to be move > successful. But a paper book is not easily searchable. What about a word > doc... argh... can you imagine... maybe there are better tools for Mac or > Unix, but I'm currently mostly on a PC. > > Can you help? Do you have a better strategy, or tool to recommend? I've > googled a few times for things like this but never found anything > satisfactory. > > Cheers, > John > > > > > > > -- > John Cumbers, Graduate Student > Biology and Medicine > Brown University, Box G-W > Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA > Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 > UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 -- John Cumbers, Graduate Student Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry Biology and Medicine Brown University, Box G-W Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080208/0a9e32a4/attachment.htm From dan.bolser at gmail.com Fri Feb 8 16:36:08 2008 From: dan.bolser at gmail.com (Dan Bolser) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 22:36:08 +0100 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) Message-ID: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I am [[User:Dan Bolser]] ;-) I thought I would email the list to say hello, and to voice some of my initial thoughts and questions about OpenWetWare! I think that OpenWetWare is a great project. It has a very nice website, very good information, very well laid out. Now that I have an account, I have found even more nice features - I really love the bibliography management stuff! Its very impressive! The calendar extensions look very nice too (not yet got into the details). I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would love to join the conversation. The main question about the system that I have is this, I was wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you benefit from having more control over your users and more 'restricted' content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that 'the more the better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, along with a slight delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Perhaps you think it is better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I don't think it is good policy. I would like to see more 'open' access to all the features of the site. I am still exploring the content of the site - there is a lot to look at, and for a newbie like me, a lot to take in! It is really great to find such a mature project like this, and I am very much enjoying moving around the site and finding new content. One final question about the development of OpenWetWare, do you plan to (or have you explored) the possibility of using Semantic Mediawiki? I am thinking of exploring that system in more detail with regard to some of my own projects (more below), and I would be interested to know about any plans, experience, or expertise that exists within OpenWetWare. About me... I maintain a 'user contributed database of biological databases' called 'MetaBase' here; http://BioDatabase.Org thanks in very large part to Michael Galperin's 'online Molecular Biology Database Collection', but also to a core of ace contributors. I also am trying to build a 'literature wiki' here; http://Introductome.Org but that is still very (very) beta. For me, the whole 'wiki' thing was first introduced by my friend Jong Park, who runs more wikies than you could imagine from here; http://BiO.CC He and his colleagues started the 'open-free information competition' that gave me the help needed to start MetaBase. Well... I hope that wasn't too spammy - Just so you know where I am coming from. Thanks again for the amazing site, I am looking forward to discovering more! Dan. From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Feb 8 18:03:29 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:03:29 -0600 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802081703.29776.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 08 February 2008, Dan Bolser wrote: > I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with > anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to > an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to > with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in > irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would > love to join the conversation. I also recommend #bioinformatics. > The main question about the system that I have is this, I was > wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How > come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you Here's my take on this, and I do not mean to intrude, but it seems that OWW is more geared towards professors and labs and the marketing has been in _that_ more than anything else. I bet Drew is off trying to convert more professors as we speak. And that's why it's restrictive ... maybe it's some private funding going into all of these labs or something. > benefit from having more control over your users and more > 'restricted' content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that > 'the more the better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, > along with a slight delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Yep. Put me off for an entire year. > Perhaps you think it is better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I > don't think it is good policy. I would like to see more 'open' access > to all the features of the site. I can't help but promote my own somewhat relevant wiki over at: http://biohack.sf.net/wiki/ > One final question about the development of OpenWetWare, do you plan > to (or have you explored) the possibility of using Semantic > Mediawiki? I am thinking of exploring that system in more detail with > regard to some of my own projects (more below), and I would be > interested to know about any plans, experience, or expertise that > exists within OpenWetWare. Btw, there seems to be some weekly(?) teleconferences, but I haven't been let in on this yet. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From rshetty at MIT.EDU Fri Feb 8 18:40:09 2008 From: rshetty at MIT.EDU (Reshma Shetty) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 18:40:09 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <200802081703.29776.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802081703.29776.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6e9f40380802081540u35c8a049k9c7c4005e76a78b2@mail.gmail.com> Hi Dan and Bryan, First off, welcome to OWW and thanks for your emails. See my comments below. On Feb 8, 2008 6:03 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Friday 08 February 2008, Dan Bolser wrote: > > I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with > > anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to > > an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to > > with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in > > irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would > > love to join the conversation. > > I also recommend #bioinformatics. OWW doesn't have an IRC backend but that's a good idea. Perhaps one of you could bring it up at the next steering committee meeting? (See below.) > > The main question about the system that I have is this, I was > > wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How > > come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you > > Here's my take on this, and I do not mean to intrude, but it seems that > OWW is more geared towards professors and labs and the marketing has > been in _that_ more than anything else. I bet Drew is off trying to > convert more professors as we speak. And that's why it's > restrictive ... maybe it's some private funding going into all of these > labs or something. The biggest reason why OWW doesn't allow for anonymous edits is spam control. Although the OWW community is very active and vibrant given how young the site is, we didn't feel ... especially in the early stages ... that OWW community had enough bandwidth to cope with the wiki spammers. In fact, OWW has actually imported sites like Wikiomics (formerly at http://wikiomics.org/wiki/Main_Page now at http://openwetware.org/wiki/Wikiomics) that *were* open to anonymous edits but became so spam-laden that the spam outcompeted the "good content". Certainly Wikipedia has successfully managed to to have a user community that can respond quicker than the spammers. However, most OWW users are more interested in spending time sharing useful content than removing spam. FYI, all of OpenWetWare's past and current funding sources are listed at http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Support OpenWetWare's funding has *no* impact on the account policy. > > benefit from having more control over your users and more > > 'restricted' content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that > > 'the more the better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, > > along with a slight delay, but that will put a lot of people off. > > Yep. Put me off for an entire year. You're right that OWW is probably discouraging some folks from contributing because of the effort involved in user registration. However, part of the mission of OpenWetWare is to encourage researchers in biological science and engineering to share and be more open in their work. An important part of the culture in research is taking responsibility for your work and receiving credit for your work. Hence, the steering committee adopted a policy where usernames reflect a person's real name. See http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Username_policy for more background. > > Perhaps you think it is better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I > > don't think it is good policy. I would like to see more 'open' access > > to all the features of the site. Thanks for the feedback. Perhaps a topic for the next steering committee meeting ... see below. > I can't help but promote my own somewhat relevant wiki over at: > http://biohack.sf.net/wiki/ Looks cool. The more people freely sharing content in biological science and engineering, the better! > > One final question about the development of OpenWetWare, do you plan > > to (or have you explored) the possibility of using Semantic > > Mediawiki? I am thinking of exploring that system in more detail with > > regard to some of my own projects (more below), and I would be > > interested to know about any plans, experience, or expertise that > > exists within OpenWetWare. We have been considering using Semantic MediaWiki as well and are thinking about deploying it on a trial basis on OWW. We're still figuring out how to make best use of it for OWW. > Btw, there seems to be some weekly(?) teleconferences, but I haven't > been let in on this yet. The OpenWetWare steering committee meets once a month simultanously by phone conference and in the online chat room. See http://openwetware.org/wiki/Steering_committee The steering committee is an volunteer group of OWW users that guides the overall direction of the site and represents the voice of the user community. Anyone is welcome to join so do join in :) Thanks, Reshma From julius at younglucks.com Fri Feb 8 18:44:31 2008 From: julius at younglucks.com (Julius Lucks) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 15:44:31 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> Hi Dan, In addition to what Reshma said: Many thanks for your generous feedback! We would like to encourage as much feedback as possible from OWW users to help guide the steering committee. I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with > anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to > an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to > with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in > irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would > love to join the conversation. > This is a great point and something we will look into. If you can think of any ways that we might advertise the chatting feature more so more users use it, that would be great. One of my main interests is to figure out how OWW can bring people together more, and I think the chatting feature is one place that we can do that. > > The main question about the system that I have is this, I was > wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How > come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you > benefit from having more control over your users and more 'restricted' > content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that 'the more the > better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, along with a slight > delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Perhaps you think it is > better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I don't think it is good > policy. I would like to see more 'open' access to all the features of > the site. Interesting thoughts. Basically it boils down to the target audience of OWW which is more along the lines of professional scientists and students of science rather than people casually interested in science. Of course anyone is welcome to read and re-use the content of OWW, but we require registration so that we have a solid provenance link between content and who wrote it. This is because the information on OWW is primarily scientific in nature - protocols, experimental plans, experimental data, etc. We take this very seriously because we want the integrity of the data and associated discussion on OWW to be as high as possible. We are even considering trying to promote OWW contributions as cite-able material in which the current scientific value system mandates a name to be associated with the content. We also have a slightly different article model than wikipedia - rather than having one page per topic, we really have one page per person per topic. That is, multiple researchers working on the same topic will have different views on the topic that should all be equally represented. It makes things different enough that we have to consider that when we talk about how OWW is structured. > > > I am still exploring the content of the site - there is a lot to look > at, and for a newbie like me, a lot to take in! It is really great to > find such a mature project like this, and I am very much enjoying > moving around the site and finding new content. How are you finding stuff on the site? Internal search engine? Google? Following Links? Recent Changes? - We would really appreciate feedback in this area so that we can improve. Thanks again, Julius OWW Outreach Chair -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080208/fa244517/attachment.htm From johncumbers at gmail.com Fri Feb 8 23:20:31 2008 From: johncumbers at gmail.com (John Cumbers) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 23:20:31 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Dan, Bryan, All, You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, Thu 14th Feb, noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the Steering committee will be on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with others about stuff. It's the first one, but I presume we'll meet in the chat room on the main page. cheers, John On Feb 8, 2008 6:44 PM, Julius Lucks wrote: > Hi Dan, > > In addition to what Reshma said: > > Many thanks for your generous feedback! We would like to encourage as > much feedback as possible from OWW users to help guide the steering > committee. > > I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with > > anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to > > an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to > > with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in > > irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would > > love to join the conversation. > > > > This is a great point and something we will look into. If you can think > of any ways that we might advertise the chatting feature more so more users > use it, that would be great. One of my main interests is to figure out how > OWW can bring people together more, and I think the chatting feature is one > place that we can do that. > > > > > > The main question about the system that I have is this, I was > > wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How > > come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you > > benefit from having more control over your users and more 'restricted' > > content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that 'the more the > > better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, along with a slight > > delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Perhaps you think it is > > better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I don't think it is good > > policy. I would like to see more 'open' access to all the features of > > the site. > > > Interesting thoughts. Basically it boils down to the target audience of > OWW which is more along the lines of professional scientists and students of > science rather than people casually interested in science. Of course anyone > is welcome to read and re-use the content of OWW, but we require > registration so that we have a solid provenance link between content and who > wrote it. This is because the information on OWW is primarily scientific in > nature - protocols, experimental plans, experimental data, etc. We take > this very seriously because we want the integrity of the data and associated > discussion on OWW to be as high as possible. We are even considering trying > to promote OWW contributions as cite-able material in which the current > scientific value system mandates a name to be associated with the content. > > We also have a slightly different article model than wikipedia - rather > than having one page per topic, we really have one page per person per > topic. That is, multiple researchers working on the same topic will have > different views on the topic that should all be equally represented. It > makes things different enough that we have to consider that when we talk > about how OWW is structured. > > > > > > > > I am still exploring the content of the site - there is a lot to look > > at, and for a newbie like me, a lot to take in! It is really great to > > find such a mature project like this, and I am very much enjoying > > moving around the site and finding new content. > > > How are you finding stuff on the site? Internal search engine? Google? > Following Links? Recent Changes? - We would really appreciate feedback in > this area so that we can improve. > > Thanks again, > > Julius > OWW Outreach Chair > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -- John Cumbers, Graduate Student Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry Biology and Medicine Brown University, Box G-W Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080208/5098f1a5/attachment.htm From jasonk at MIT.EDU Fri Feb 8 23:30:58 2008 From: jasonk at MIT.EDU (Jason Kelly) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 23:30:58 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki pages. That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same place. If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back to the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat rooms disappeared? thanks, jason On Feb 8, 2008 11:20 PM, John Cumbers wrote: > Hi Dan, Bryan, All, > You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, Thu 14th > Feb, noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the Steering committee will > be on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with others about > stuff. It's the first one, but I presume we'll meet in the chat room on the > main page. > cheers, > John > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008 6:44 PM, Julius Lucks wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > In addition to what Reshma said: > > > > Many thanks for your generous feedback! We would like to encourage as > much feedback as possible from OWW users to help guide the steering > committee. > > > > > > > > > > > I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with > > > anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to > > > an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to > > > with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in > > > irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would > > > love to join the conversation. > > > > > > > > > This is a great point and something we will look into. If you can think > of any ways that we might advertise the chatting feature more so more users > use it, that would be great. One of my main interests is to figure out how > OWW can bring people together more, and I think the chatting feature is one > place that we can do that. > > > > > > > > > > The main question about the system that I have is this, I was > > > wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How > > > come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you > > > benefit from having more control over your users and more 'restricted' > > > content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that 'the more the > > > better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, along with a slight > > > delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Perhaps you think it is > > > better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I don't think it is good > > > policy. I would like to see more 'open' access to all the features of > > > the site. > > > > > > Interesting thoughts. Basically it boils down to the target audience of > OWW which is more along the lines of professional scientists and students of > science rather than people casually interested in science. Of course anyone > is welcome to read and re-use the content of OWW, but we require > registration so that we have a solid provenance link between content and who > wrote it. This is because the information on OWW is primarily scientific in > nature - protocols, experimental plans, experimental data, etc. We take > this very seriously because we want the integrity of the data and associated > discussion on OWW to be as high as possible. We are even considering trying > to promote OWW contributions as cite-able material in which the current > scientific value system mandates a name to be associated with the content. > > > > We also have a slightly different article model than wikipedia - rather > than having one page per topic, we really have one page per person per > topic. That is, multiple researchers working on the same topic will have > different views on the topic that should all be equally represented. It > makes things different enough that we have to consider that when we talk > about how OWW is structured. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am still exploring the content of the site - there is a lot to look > > > at, and for a newbie like me, a lot to take in! It is really great to > > > find such a mature project like this, and I am very much enjoying > > > moving around the site and finding new content. > > > > > > How are you finding stuff on the site? Internal search engine? Google? > Following Links? Recent Changes? - We would really appreciate feedback in > this area so that we can improve. > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > > Julius > > OWW Outreach Chair > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > -- > John Cumbers, Graduate Student > Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry > Biology and Medicine > Brown University, Box G-W > Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA > Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 > UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Feb 8 23:35:04 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 22:35:04 -0600 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 08 February 2008, Jason Kelly wrote: > What do people think? ?Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > rooms disappeared? Let's just go with IRC? - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From jasonk at MIT.EDU Fri Feb 8 23:39:41 2008 From: jasonk at MIT.EDU (Jason Kelly) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 23:39:41 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7c085c480802082039q4da85b90u3cce489830435d6c@mail.gmail.com> We could, though I'm guessing most OWW members don't use IRC, but I could be wrong. I don't personally use it, but I could learn. WikiChat is convenient since it's right in the site, so nothing new for people to download, etc. thanks, jason On Feb 8, 2008 11:35 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Friday 08 February 2008, Jason Kelly wrote: > > What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > > rooms disappeared? > > Let's just go with IRC? > > - Bryan > _______________________________________ _ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > From tk at csail.mit.edu Fri Feb 8 23:42:27 2008 From: tk at csail.mit.edu (Tom Knight) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 23:42:27 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2A82884F-AC2B-4CBB-8954-276D589CE9D8@csail.mit.edu> The front page could display the users currently in chat, which would make going there more enticing (or not, depending ;-) ...). On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:30 PM, Jason Kelly wrote: > One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the > "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki pages. > That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same place. > > If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back to > the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would > increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. > > What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > rooms disappeared? > > thanks, > jason > > On Feb 8, 2008 11:20 PM, John Cumbers wrote: >> Hi Dan, Bryan, All, >> You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, >> Thu 14th >> Feb, noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the Steering >> committee will >> be on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with >> others about >> stuff. It's the first one, but I presume we'll meet in the chat >> room on the >> main page. >> cheers, >> John >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 8, 2008 6:44 PM, Julius Lucks wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Dan, >>> >>> In addition to what Reshma said: >>> >>> Many thanks for your generous feedback! We would like to >>> encourage as >> much feedback as possible from OWW users to help guide the steering >> committee. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with >>>> anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an >>>> interface to >>>> an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can >>>> connect to >>>> with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in >>>> irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would >>>> love to join the conversation. >>>> >>> >>> >>> This is a great point and something we will look into. If you >>> can think >> of any ways that we might advertise the chatting feature more so >> more users >> use it, that would be great. One of my main interests is to >> figure out how >> OWW can bring people together more, and I think the chatting >> feature is one >> place that we can do that. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> The main question about the system that I have is this, I was >>>> wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive >>>> - How >>>> come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps >>>> you >>>> benefit from having more control over your users and more >>>> 'restricted' >>>> content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that 'the >>>> more the >>>> better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, along with a >>>> slight >>>> delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Perhaps you think >>>> it is >>>> better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I don't think it is good >>>> policy. I would like to see more 'open' access to all the >>>> features of >>>> the site. >>> >>> >>> Interesting thoughts. Basically it boils down to the target >>> audience of >> OWW which is more along the lines of professional scientists and >> students of >> science rather than people casually interested in science. Of >> course anyone >> is welcome to read and re-use the content of OWW, but we require >> registration so that we have a solid provenance link between >> content and who >> wrote it. This is because the information on OWW is primarily >> scientific in >> nature - protocols, experimental plans, experimental data, etc. >> We take >> this very seriously because we want the integrity of the data and >> associated >> discussion on OWW to be as high as possible. We are even >> considering trying >> to promote OWW contributions as cite-able material in which the >> current >> scientific value system mandates a name to be associated with the >> content. >>> >>> We also have a slightly different article model than wikipedia - >>> rather >> than having one page per topic, we really have one page per person >> per >> topic. That is, multiple researchers working on the same topic >> will have >> different views on the topic that should all be equally >> represented. It >> makes things different enough that we have to consider that when >> we talk >> about how OWW is structured. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I am still exploring the content of the site - there is a lot to >>>> look >>>> at, and for a newbie like me, a lot to take in! It is really >>>> great to >>>> find such a mature project like this, and I am very much enjoying >>>> moving around the site and finding new content. >>> >>> >>> How are you finding stuff on the site? Internal search engine? >>> Google? >> Following Links? Recent Changes? - We would really appreciate >> feedback in >> this area so that we can improve. >>> >>> >>> Thanks again, >>> >>> Julius >>> OWW Outreach Chair >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >>> discuss at openwetware.org >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> John Cumbers, Graduate Student >> Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry >> Biology and Medicine >> Brown University, Box G-W >> Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA >> Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 >> UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >> discuss at openwetware.org >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >> >> > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From julius at younglucks.com Sat Feb 9 12:24:10 2008 From: julius at younglucks.com (Julius B. Lucks) Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 09:24:10 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> I think this is a good idea. In general the IRC model seems to work great - one main chat room with the ability to have a private one-on- one chat if you want. J Please Reply to julius at younglucks.com On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:30 PM, "Jason Kelly" wrote: > One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the > "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki pages. > That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same place. > > If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back to > the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would > increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. > > What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > rooms disappeared? > > thanks, > jason > > On Feb 8, 2008 11:20 PM, John Cumbers wrote: >> Hi Dan, Bryan, All, >> You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, Thu >> 14th >> Feb, noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the Steering >> committee will >> be on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with >> others about >> stuff. It's the first one, but I presume we'll meet in the chat >> room on the >> main page. >> cheers, >> John >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 8, 2008 6:44 PM, Julius Lucks wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Dan, >>> >>> In addition to what Reshma said: >>> >>> Many thanks for your generous feedback! We would like to >>> encourage as >> much feedback as possible from OWW users to help guide the steering >> committee. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with >>>> anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface >>>> to >>>> an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect >>>> to >>>> with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in >>>> irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would >>>> love to join the conversation. >>>> >>> >>> >>> This is a great point and something we will look into. If you can >>> think >> of any ways that we might advertise the chatting feature more so >> more users >> use it, that would be great. One of my main interests is to figure >> out how >> OWW can bring people together more, and I think the chatting >> feature is one >> place that we can do that. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> The main question about the system that I have is this, I was >>>> wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - >>>> How >>>> come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps >>>> you >>>> benefit from having more control over your users and more >>>> 'restricted' >>>> content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that 'the >>>> more the >>>> better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, along with a >>>> slight >>>> delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Perhaps you think >>>> it is >>>> better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I don't think it is good >>>> policy. I would like to see more 'open' access to all the >>>> features of >>>> the site. >>> >>> >>> Interesting thoughts. Basically it boils down to the target >>> audience of >> OWW which is more along the lines of professional scientists and >> students of >> science rather than people casually interested in science. Of >> course anyone >> is welcome to read and re-use the content of OWW, but we require >> registration so that we have a solid provenance link between >> content and who >> wrote it. This is because the information on OWW is primarily >> scientific in >> nature - protocols, experimental plans, experimental data, etc. We >> take >> this very seriously because we want the integrity of the data and >> associated >> discussion on OWW to be as high as possible. We are even >> considering trying >> to promote OWW contributions as cite-able material in which the >> current >> scientific value system mandates a name to be associated with the >> content. >>> >>> We also have a slightly different article model than wikipedia - >>> rather >> than having one page per topic, we really have one page per person >> per >> topic. That is, multiple researchers working on the same topic >> will have >> different views on the topic that should all be equally >> represented. It >> makes things different enough that we have to consider that when we >> talk >> about how OWW is structured. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I am still exploring the content of the site - there is a lot to >>>> look >>>> at, and for a newbie like me, a lot to take in! It is really >>>> great to >>>> find such a mature project like this, and I am very much enjoying >>>> moving around the site and finding new content. >>> >>> >>> How are you finding stuff on the site? Internal search engine? >>> Google? >> Following Links? Recent Changes? - We would really appreciate >> feedback in >> this area so that we can improve. >>> >>> >>> Thanks again, >>> >>> Julius >>> OWW Outreach Chair >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >>> discuss at openwetware.org >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> John Cumbers, Graduate Student >> Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry >> Biology and Medicine >> Brown University, Box G-W >> Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA >> Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 >> UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >> discuss at openwetware.org >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >> >> From austin at csail.mit.edu Sat Feb 9 18:57:56 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2008 18:57:56 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> (Julius B. Lucks's message of "Sat, 9 Feb 2008 09:24:10 -0800") References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> Message-ID: <8763wxvg1n.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> I've simply removed the extra chat tabs from all pages. This gets rid of the page specific chat rooms. We can simply add a link to Special:Chat anywhere like the sidebar. This still allows people to jump into arbitrary rooms with something like http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat/random I personally think an IRC backend with a web/php front end would be the ideal combination. > I think this is a good idea. In general the IRC model seems to work > great - one main chat room with the ability to have a private one-on- > one chat if you want. > > J > > Please Reply to julius at younglucks.com > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:30 PM, "Jason Kelly" wrote: > >> One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the >> "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki pages. >> That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same place. >> >> If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back to >> the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would >> increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. >> >> What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat >> rooms disappeared? -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From bill.altmail at gmail.com Sun Feb 10 11:40:12 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:40:12 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <8763wxvg1n.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> <8763wxvg1n.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802100840m6667b87ha36ed5588e3c6ca0@mail.gmail.com> I've installed an extension that I'd looked at before but never used. Check it out here: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1 This is a "current online users" list. The first version is pretty simple. All it shows is the IP address (I added for debugging) and the username. The anonymous users aren't displayed but the total counts of both the anonymous and registered users is. The list can be formatted as is required. Anything in the User's preference page can be included. To put the list on another page, just use the tag: There's a new table in the database called 'online'. Currently the table contains the timestamp, ip address, and the username of each logged in user. I have some ideas, based upon some of the comments of late, about what we can do with this. One thing is to extend it to also contain the online chat status. I'd like to head what other people think. We can also extend it to show a view of whos is logged into the private wikis or who is currently logged into WordPress MU and at least display the total number of users of that system. Let me know what you think. Try logging in and out and see if the page changes. It seems to be working pretty well. Thanks. B. On Feb 9, 2008 6:57 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > I've simply removed the extra chat tabs from all pages. This gets > rid of the page specific chat rooms. We can simply add a link to > Special:Chat anywhere like the sidebar. This still allows people > to jump into arbitrary rooms with something like > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat/random > > I personally think an IRC backend with a web/php front end would > be the ideal combination. > > > I think this is a good idea. In general the IRC model seems to work > > great - one main chat room with the ability to have a private one-on- > > one chat if you want. > > > > J > > > > Please Reply to julius at younglucks.com > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:30 PM, "Jason Kelly" wrote: > > > >> One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the > >> "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki pages. > >> That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same place. > >> > >> If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back to > >> the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would > >> increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. > >> > >> What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > >> rooms disappeared? > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080210/de32b399/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Sun Feb 10 12:13:57 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:13:57 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> I don't know what others think but maybe we should just pause and evaluate before jumping. This is a good suggestion but we currently have no Internet support for any protocols besides HTTP on our server. In other words, we run with a pretty well locked-down firewall. When we recently opened up a tiny hole to allow people to send feedback messages, we were immediately beset with spam. Supporting a new protocol like IRC would have to be a decision we'd make as a group and not on the spur of the moment. Our current chat is javascript and browser-based; it really consumes a lot of resources. I agree that moving away from it is a good idea. But I think we need to assess our needs a little more completely than this to make a pretty major decision. I'm also personally reluctant to embrace IRC when so many people seem to be moving to more sophisticated chat servers and services. As a matter of fact, I'd suspect that most of our users, not generally being of the computer science variety, would favor something like Jabber, something that's compatible with Google Talk, Apple iChat, and IBM's SameTime. It's also supported by many other chat clients. The Jabber and XMPP specs are the only real "standards" out there. I know that IRC is pretty open but there's no major network that directly supports it. XMPP and Jabber are pretty much the same protocol at this point and therefore the most likely to be with us in the future. There's good deal of work going on to merge voice, text, and video chat via XMPP. I'd love to be convinced otherwise. Show us the data and the context of the data and we can evaluate it. I really like what Austin has done: he made the current chat service simpler. I've also brought up the first real-time user list we've had. You can see the first cut here: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1 More will follow. I think it's great to get a fresh look at the system. As you can see, we want to accommodate as many user styles as we can. But without data to support our hunches, I recommend we take this step by step. Since, as a rule, we try to set development tasks as a function of our monthly Steering Committee (SC) meetings, you may want to join us for the next meeting and discuss it with all of us at that time. Thanks. Bill Flanagan On Feb 8, 2008 11:35 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Friday 08 February 2008, Jason Kelly wrote: > > What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > > rooms disappeared? > > Let's just go with IRC? > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080210/06bcfe7c/attachment.htm From dan.bolser at gmail.com Sun Feb 10 12:18:23 2008 From: dan.bolser at gmail.com (Dan Bolser) Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:18:23 +0100 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802100840m6667b87ha36ed5588e3c6ca0@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> <8763wxvg1n.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <26428aaa0802100840m6667b87ha36ed5588e3c6ca0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2c8757af0802100918i5f6b9641mffbf799efa5bd19e@mail.gmail.com> Looks good :D Still no one chatting? ;-) Cheers, Dan. On 10/02/2008, Bill F wrote: > I've installed an extension that I'd looked at before but never used. > > Check it out here: > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1 > > This is a "current online users" list. The first version is pretty simple. > All it shows is the IP address (I added for debugging) and the username. The > anonymous users aren't displayed but the total counts of both the anonymous > and registered users is. > > The list can be formatted as is required. Anything in the User's preference > page can be included. > > To put the list on another page, just use the tag: > > > > There's a new table in the database called 'online'. Currently the table > contains the timestamp, ip address, and the username of each logged in user. > > I have some ideas, based upon some of the comments of late, about what we > can do with this. One thing is to extend it to also contain the online chat > status. I'd like to head what other people think. > > We can also extend it to show a view of whos is logged into the private > wikis or who is currently logged into WordPress MU and at least display the > total number of users of that system. > > Let me know what you think. Try logging in and out and see if the page > changes. It seems to be working pretty well. > > Thanks. > > B. > > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 6:57 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > > > > I've simply removed the extra chat tabs from all pages. This gets > > rid of the page specific chat rooms. We can simply add a link to > > Special:Chat anywhere like the sidebar. This still allows people > > to jump into arbitrary rooms with something like > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat/random > > > > I personally think an IRC backend with a web/php front end would > > be the ideal combination. > > > > > > > I think this is a good idea. In general the IRC model seems to work > > > great - one main chat room with the ability to have a private one-on- > > > one chat if you want. > > > > > > J > > > > > > Please Reply to julius at younglucks.com > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:30 PM, "Jason Kelly" wrote: > > > > > >> One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the > > >> "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki pages. > > >> That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same place. > > >> > > >> If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back to > > >> the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would > > >> increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. > > >> > > >> What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > > >> rooms disappeared? > > > > -- > > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -- hello From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Feb 10 12:28:13 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:28:13 -0600 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat (was: Hello list! (I'm new)) In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> On Sunday 10 February 2008, "Bill F" wrote: > This is a good suggestion but we currently have no Internet support > for any protocols besides HTTP on our server. In other words, we run > with a pretty well locked-down firewall. That's okay. Another temporary service can be used, such as freenode, which hosts IRC channels for example. You mention Jabber and other chat services, and unfortunately I can't cite any free chat hosting services there (and I don't remember if Jabber allows for chatrooms - I'm sure it does. I'll go ask jer.) > When we recently opened up a tiny hole to allow people to send > feedback messages, we were immediately beset with spam. Supporting a > new protocol like IRC would have to be a decision we'd make as a > group and not on the spur of the moment. Freenode has configuration settings that lets them avoid lots of spam, and for the most part websites do not tend to get a lot of spam. There's a way that we can run some bots in the background to kick spammers out, and if necessary I'll nominate myself to set up such a bot and run it from one of my servers. > Our current chat is javascript and browser-based; it really consumes > a lot of resources. I agree that moving away from it is a good idea. Woah. :) > I'm also personally reluctant to embrace IRC when so many people seem > to be moving to more sophisticated chat servers and services. As a IRC is just generally a good idea. Also, I do not mind if it's not an official chat medium. Anybody that wants to join me for chat can log on to irc.freenode.net channel #openwetware. (Heh. Looks like Dan is already there.) > matter of fact, I'd suspect that most of our users, not generally > being of the computer science variety, would favor something like > Jabber, something that's compatible with Google Talk, Apple iChat, > and IBM's SameTime. It's also supported by many other chat clients. Re: Jabber. Looks like there's an extra service-daemon to download. http://www.jabber.org/user/userguide/#groupchat -- but at least Jabber lets you hook in other IM protocols. :) > The Jabber and XMPP specs are the only real "standards" out there. I True. > know that IRC is pretty open but there's no major network that > directly supports it. XMPP and Jabber are pretty much the same > protocol at this point and therefore the most likely to be with us in > the future. There's good deal of work going on to merge voice, text, > and video chat via XMPP. I'd love to be convinced otherwise. Show us > the data and the context of the data and we can evaluate it. It does indeed seem to be the emerging open way of doing communication. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From julius.lucks at gmail.com Sun Feb 10 14:13:30 2008 From: julius.lucks at gmail.com (julius.lucks) Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:13:30 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802100840m6667b87ha36ed5588e3c6ca0@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> <8763wxvg1n.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <26428aaa0802100840m6667b87ha36ed5588e3c6ca0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <377C154E-86AF-4087-A492-F8782D78E124@gmail.com> Hey Bill, This is really cool. The formatting of the page needs a little bit of work I think, but certainly something very useful to have. It is amazing how few people are logged in on a sunday! Julius ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- Please Reply to My Permanent Address: julius at younglucks.com http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------- On Feb 10, 2008, at 8:40 AM, Bill F wrote: > I've installed an extension that I'd looked at before but never used. > > Check it out here: > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1 > > This is a "current online users" list. The first version is pretty > simple. All it shows is the IP address (I added for debugging) and > the username. The anonymous users aren't displayed but the total > counts of both the anonymous and registered users is. > > The list can be formatted as is required. Anything in the User's > preference page can be included. > > To put the list on another page, just use the tag: > > > > There's a new table in the database called 'online'. Currently the > table contains the timestamp, ip address, and the username of each > logged in user. > > I have some ideas, based upon some of the comments of late, about > what we can do with this. One thing is to extend it to also contain > the online chat status. I'd like to head what other people think. > > We can also extend it to show a view of whos is logged into the > private wikis or who is currently logged into WordPress MU and at > least display the total number of users of that system. > > Let me know what you think. Try logging in and out and see if the > page changes. It seems to be working pretty well. > > Thanks. > > B. > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 6:57 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > I've simply removed the extra chat tabs from all pages. This gets > rid of the page specific chat rooms. We can simply add a link to > Special:Chat anywhere like the sidebar. This still allows people > to jump into arbitrary rooms with something like > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat/random > > I personally think an IRC backend with a web/php front end would > be the ideal combination. > > > I think this is a good idea. In general the IRC model seems to work > > great - one main chat room with the ability to have a private one- > on- > > one chat if you want. > > > > J > > > > Please Reply to julius at younglucks.com > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:30 PM, "Jason Kelly" wrote: > > > >> One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the > >> "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki > pages. > >> That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same > place. > >> > >> If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go > back to > >> the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would > >> increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. > >> > >> What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > >> rooms disappeared? > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080210/8c61c01c/attachment.htm From jasonk at MIT.EDU Sun Feb 10 14:35:39 2008 From: jasonk at MIT.EDU (Jason Kelly) Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 14:35:39 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <377C154E-86AF-4087-A492-F8782D78E124@gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> <8763wxvg1n.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <26428aaa0802100840m6667b87ha36ed5588e3c6ca0@mail.gmail.com> <377C154E-86AF-4087-A492-F8782D78E124@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7c085c480802101135u5d77e5a1nfda536b72894d9b5@mail.gmail.com> I'd actually be surprised if there are ever a lot of people logged in to edit at the same time. I'm not sure exactly what the typical usage pattern looks like for OWW members, but I'm guessing many people go to the site to check a couple things, make a quick edit or two, and then leave. Better publication of who is logged in currently might actually give folks more reason to hang around though. cool feature for sure, will be neat to watch it. thanks, jason On Feb 10, 2008 2:13 PM, julius.lucks wrote: > Hey Bill, > > This is really cool. The formatting of the page needs a little bit of work > I think, but certainly something very useful to have. > > It is amazing how few people are logged in on a sunday! > > Julius > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Please Reply to My Permanent Address: julius at younglucks.com > http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > On Feb 10, 2008, at 8:40 AM, Bill F wrote: > I've installed an extension that I'd looked at before but never used. > > Check it out here: > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1 > > This is a "current online users" list. The first version is pretty simple. > All it shows is the IP address (I added for debugging) and the username. The > anonymous users aren't displayed but the total counts of both the anonymous > and registered users is. > > The list can be formatted as is required. Anything in the User's preference > page can be included. > > To put the list on another page, just use the tag: > > > > There's a new table in the database called 'online'. Currently the table > contains the timestamp, ip address, and the username of each logged in user. > > I have some ideas, based upon some of the comments of late, about what we > can do with this. One thing is to extend it to also contain the online chat > status. I'd like to head what other people think. > > We can also extend it to show a view of whos is logged into the private > wikis or who is currently logged into WordPress MU and at least display the > total number of users of that system. > > Let me know what you think. Try logging in and out and see if the page > changes. It seems to be working pretty well. > > Thanks. > > B. > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 6:57 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > > > > I've simply removed the extra chat tabs from all pages. This gets > > rid of the page specific chat rooms. We can simply add a link to > > Special:Chat anywhere like the sidebar. This still allows people > > to jump into arbitrary rooms with something like > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat/random > > > > I personally think an IRC backend with a web/php front end would > > be the ideal combination. > > > > > > > I think this is a good idea. In general the IRC model seems to work > > > great - one main chat room with the ability to have a private one-on- > > > one chat if you want. > > > > > > J > > > > > > Please Reply to julius at younglucks.com > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:30 PM, "Jason Kelly" wrote: > > > > > >> One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the > > >> "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki pages. > > >> That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same place. > > >> > > >> If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back to > > >> the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would > > >> increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. > > >> > > >> What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > > >> rooms disappeared? > > > > -- > > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > From ilyas at MIT.EDU Tue Feb 12 17:40:14 2008 From: ilyas at MIT.EDU (Ilya Sytchev) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:40:14 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat In-Reply-To: <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> One potentially useful side-effect of using a "real" chat back-end (IRC or Jabber/XMPP) is the ability to exchange files directly - may be useful for sending those huge microscope images to collaborators in close-to-real time, etc. Ilya Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Sunday 10 February 2008, "Bill F" wrote: >> This is a good suggestion but we currently have no Internet support >> for any protocols besides HTTP on our server. In other words, we run >> with a pretty well locked-down firewall. > > That's okay. Another temporary service can be used, such as freenode, > which hosts IRC channels for example. You mention Jabber and other chat > services, and unfortunately I can't cite any free chat hosting services > there (and I don't remember if Jabber allows for chatrooms - I'm sure > it does. I'll go ask jer.) > >> When we recently opened up a tiny hole to allow people to send >> feedback messages, we were immediately beset with spam. Supporting a >> new protocol like IRC would have to be a decision we'd make as a >> group and not on the spur of the moment. > > Freenode has configuration settings that lets them avoid lots of spam, > and for the most part websites do not tend to get a lot of spam. > There's a way that we can run some bots in the background to kick > spammers out, and if necessary I'll nominate myself to set up such a > bot and run it from one of my servers. > >> Our current chat is javascript and browser-based; it really consumes >> a lot of resources. I agree that moving away from it is a good idea. > > Woah. :) > >> I'm also personally reluctant to embrace IRC when so many people seem >> to be moving to more sophisticated chat servers and services. As a > > IRC is just generally a good idea. Also, I do not mind if it's not an > official chat medium. Anybody that wants to join me for chat can log on > to irc.freenode.net channel #openwetware. (Heh. Looks like Dan is > already there.) > >> matter of fact, I'd suspect that most of our users, not generally >> being of the computer science variety, would favor something like >> Jabber, something that's compatible with Google Talk, Apple iChat, >> and IBM's SameTime. It's also supported by many other chat clients. > > Re: Jabber. Looks like there's an extra service-daemon to download. > http://www.jabber.org/user/userguide/#groupchat > -- but at least Jabber lets you hook in other IM protocols. :) > >> The Jabber and XMPP specs are the only real "standards" out there. I > > True. > >> know that IRC is pretty open but there's no major network that >> directly supports it. XMPP and Jabber are pretty much the same >> protocol at this point and therefore the most likely to be with us in >> the future. There's good deal of work going on to merge voice, text, >> and video chat via XMPP. I'd love to be convinced otherwise. Show us >> the data and the context of the data and we can evaluate it. > > It does indeed seem to be the emerging open way of doing communication. > > - Bryan > ________________________________________ > Bryan Bishop > http://heybryan.org/ > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From austin at csail.mit.edu Tue Feb 12 19:52:20 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:52:20 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat In-Reply-To: <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> (Ilya Sytchev's message of "Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:40:14 -0500") References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> Message-ID: <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> I've installed a jabber server on openwetware for testing (openfire). Here's what you need to do: - log in to oww - go to your preferences and change your password (you can set new equal to old password) and save - now use any jabber client and connect to your oww username with spaces replaced by underscored and all lowercased at the domain openwetware.org, e.g. "austin_j._che at openwetware.org" with your password being your oww password - chat away For chat rooms, the service is called conference.openwetware.org so you can join arbitrary rooms like lounge at conference.openwetware.org I've installed some plugins also that should also allow you to talk with other services like AIM, Yahoo, etc. -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 00:29:19 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:29:19 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat In-Reply-To: <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802122129h504a58a9vcc531730b2b56862@mail.gmail.com> I installed it on my laptop this weekend and love it. I think it's a great fit. On Feb 12, 2008 7:52 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > I've installed a jabber server on openwetware for testing > (openfire). Here's what you need to do: > - log in to oww > - go to your preferences and change your password (you can set new > equal to old password) and save > - now use any jabber client and connect to your oww username with > spaces replaced by underscored and all lowercased at the domain > openwetware.org, e.g. "austin_j._che at openwetware.org" with your > password being your oww password > - chat away > > For chat rooms, the service is called conference.openwetware.org > so you can join arbitrary rooms like > lounge at conference.openwetware.org > > I've installed some plugins also that should also allow you to > talk with other services like AIM, Yahoo, etc. > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/d5412b32/attachment.htm From austin at csail.mit.edu Wed Feb 13 08:40:37 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:40:37 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat In-Reply-To: <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> (Austin Che's message of "Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:52:20 -0500") References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <87prv16kkq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> And here's a web-based ajax jabber client that can likely be used as a replacement for phpfreechat: http://jwchat.org/ It works for me on firefox but not opera. Server openwetware.org, username/password as normal. > I've installed a jabber server on openwetware for testing > (openfire). Here's what you need to do: > - log in to oww > - go to your preferences and change your password (you can set new > equal to old password) and save > - now use any jabber client and connect to your oww username with > spaces replaced by underscored and all lowercased at the domain > openwetware.org, e.g. "austin_j._che at openwetware.org" with your > password being your oww password > - chat away > > For chat rooms, the service is called conference.openwetware.org > so you can join arbitrary rooms like > lounge at conference.openwetware.org > > I've installed some plugins also that should also allow you to > talk with other services like AIM, Yahoo, etc. -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From rvidal at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 10:47:18 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:47:18 +0000 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat In-Reply-To: <87prv16kkq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <87prv16kkq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <213fc43b0802130747m231b650an9f5003f67f03ecef@mail.gmail.com> I've got it all working pretty well using Pidgin (www.pidgin.im) Great work Austin :) On Feb 13, 2008 1:40 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > And here's a web-based ajax jabber client that can likely be used > as a replacement for phpfreechat: > http://jwchat.org/ > > It works for me on firefox but not opera. Server openwetware.org, > username/password as normal. > > > I've installed a jabber server on openwetware for testing > > (openfire). Here's what you need to do: > > - log in to oww > > - go to your preferences and change your password (you can set new > > equal to old password) and save > > - now use any jabber client and connect to your oww username with > > spaces replaced by underscored and all lowercased at the domain > > openwetware.org, e.g. "austin_j._che at openwetware.org" with your > > password being your oww password > > - chat away > > > > For chat rooms, the service is called conference.openwetware.org > > so you can join arbitrary rooms like > > lounge at conference.openwetware.org > > > > I've installed some plugins also that should also allow you to > > talk with other services like AIM, Yahoo, etc. > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -- Ricardo Vidal e: rvidal at gmail.com w: http://my.biotechlife.net skype: icky_bu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/0416033f/attachment.htm From dan.bolser at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 13:16:25 2008 From: dan.bolser at gmail.com (Dan Bolser) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:16:25 +0100 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <6e9f40380802081540u35c8a049k9c7c4005e76a78b2@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802081703.29776.kanzure@gmail.com> <6e9f40380802081540u35c8a049k9c7c4005e76a78b2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2c8757af0802131016t2047ccd5g9a0bcb4a1f668916@mail.gmail.com> OK, I finally got round to replying properly ;-) On 09/02/2008, Reshma Shetty wrote: > Hi Dan and Bryan, > > First off, welcome to OWW and thanks for your emails. See my comments below. > > On Feb 8, 2008 6:03 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > > On Friday 08 February 2008, Dan Bolser wrote: > > > I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with > > > anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to > > > an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to > > > with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in > > > irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some who would > > > love to join the conversation. > > > > I also recommend #bioinformatics. > > OWW doesn't have an IRC backend but that's a good idea. Perhaps one > of you could bring it up at the next steering committee meeting? (See > below.) > > > > The main question about the system that I have is this, I was > > > wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How > > > come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you > > > > Here's my take on this, and I do not mean to intrude, but it seems that > > OWW is more geared towards professors and labs and the marketing has > > been in _that_ more than anything else. I bet Drew is off trying to > > convert more professors as we speak. And that's why it's > > restrictive ... maybe it's some private funding going into all of these > > labs or something. > > The biggest reason why OWW doesn't allow for anonymous edits is spam > control. Although the OWW community is very active and vibrant given > how young the site is, we didn't feel ... especially in the early > stages ... that OWW community had enough bandwidth to cope with the > wiki spammers. In fact, OWW has actually imported sites like > Wikiomics (formerly at http://wikiomics.org/wiki/Main_Page now at > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Wikiomics) that *were* open to anonymous > edits but became so spam-laden that the spam outcompeted the "good > content". Certainly Wikipedia has successfully managed to to have a > user community that can respond quicker than the spammers. However, > most OWW users are more interested in spending time sharing useful > content than removing spam. I don't think this is a good reason. All you need is a well configured captcha. The config that I have finally settled on for MetaBase is; 1) Anonymous users are free to edit, but must solve a captcha. 2) 'Regular anonymous users' *eventually* become trusted. 3) Registration requires users to solve a captcha. 4) Registered users *never* see a captcha. You can play with how that 'feels' here; http://biodatabase.org/index.php/Main_Page For me this strikes a good balance between spam restrictive vs. open contribution policy. However, I take the point about provenance below. > FYI, all of OpenWetWare's past and current funding sources are listed > at http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Support > OpenWetWare's funding has *no* impact on the account policy. > > > > benefit from having more control over your users and more > > > 'restricted' content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that > > > 'the more the better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, > > > along with a slight delay, but that will put a lot of people off. > > > > Yep. Put me off for an entire year. > > You're right that OWW is probably discouraging some folks from > contributing because of the effort involved in user registration. > However, part of the mission of OpenWetWare is to encourage > researchers in biological science and engineering to share and be more > open in their work. An important part of the culture in research is > taking responsibility for your work and receiving credit for your > work. Hence, the steering committee adopted a policy where usernames > reflect a person's real name. See > http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Username_policy for more > background. I see. That policy is clearly reasonable, and vital when it comes to sharing of data, however, it is also clearly not necessary (re: Wikipedia). Perhaps you could try making some areas of OWW 'open' and monitor the results. Unfortunately I don't have any references, but I remember hearing about how a community of peers is very good at self regulation. Of course people could vandalize content, but generally people don't. Still - its interesting to think about a strictly 'science wiki' in contrast to Wikipedia. One question for the polls (has it been asked?); how many users / administrators of OWW are users / administrators on Wikipedia? I find that people are often genuinely surprised when they learn about the article review and quality assurance processes that takes place 'behind the scenes' on Wikipedia. > > > Perhaps you think it is better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I > > > don't think it is good policy. I would like to see more 'open' access > > > to all the features of the site. > > Thanks for the feedback. Perhaps a topic for the next steering > committee meeting ... see below. > > > I can't help but promote my own somewhat relevant wiki over at: > > http://biohack.sf.net/wiki/ > > Looks cool. The more people freely sharing content in biological > science and engineering, the better! > > > > One final question about the development of OpenWetWare, do you plan > > > to (or have you explored) the possibility of using Semantic > > > Mediawiki? I am thinking of exploring that system in more detail with > > > regard to some of my own projects (more below), and I would be > > > interested to know about any plans, experience, or expertise that > > > exists within OpenWetWare. > > We have been considering using Semantic MediaWiki as well and are > thinking about deploying it on a trial basis on OWW. We're still > figuring out how to make best use of it for OWW. Yeah, me too. Good to know that you are thinking about it! > > Btw, there seems to be some weekly(?) teleconferences, but I haven't > > been let in on this yet. > > The OpenWetWare steering committee meets once a month simultanously by > phone conference and in the online chat room. See > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Steering_committee > > The steering committee is an volunteer group of OWW users that guides > the overall direction of the site and represents the voice of the user > community. Anyone is welcome to join so do join in :) Sounds good. Not sure if I will be able to make it this time... Any archive of minutes? I should just check really! > Thanks, Thanks for the excellent website! > > Reshma > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -- hello From johncumbers at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 13:49:24 2008 From: johncumbers at gmail.com (John Cumbers) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:49:24 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est Message-ID: Hi all, First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/09/oww-action-hour-thursday-14th-feb-noon-est/#comments Meeting place: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, Thu 14th Feb, noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the steering committee will be on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with you about what's going on around the site. It's the first one, and our attempt at creating a bit more of a real time community that meets more than just once a month by phone. We'll 'meet' in the chat room on the main page. Maureen is making brownies (is that correct?) so add your name in the comments if you are coming so she can plan accordingly. Cheers, John -- John Cumbers, Graduate Student Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry Biology and Medicine Brown University, Box G-W Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/780d544d/attachment.htm From dan.bolser at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 14:06:10 2008 From: dan.bolser at gmail.com (Dan Bolser) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:06:10 +0100 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2c8757af0802131106r450bf8a4p267a0dde91ea49e4@mail.gmail.com> On 09/02/2008, Julius Lucks wrote: > Hi Dan, > > In addition to what Reshma said: > > Many thanks for your generous feedback! We would like to encourage as much > feedback as possible from OWW users to help guide the steering committee. > > > > I also like the chatting feature, but I have yet to meet up with > > anyone online at the same time as me. Is this client an interface to > > an IRC backend? i.e. do you have an IRC server that I can connect to > > with a different client? There are a group of us who hang out in > > irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics and I imagine some > who would > > love to join the conversation. > > > > This is a great point and something we will look into. If you can think of > any ways that we might advertise the chatting feature more so more users use > it, that would be great. One of my main interests is to figure out how OWW > can bring people together more, and I think the chatting feature is one > place that we can do that. Not really sure... The new technology is sure to help. Actually we are trying to boost the number of users on irc://irc.freenode.net/#bioinformatics - but it hasn't been very effective so far! (generally we have just been spamming the above link around). Oh - that reminds me, anyone curious to just 'check in' on #bioinformatics can do so here; http://www.acm.jhu.edu/cgi-irc/irc.cgi?chan=%23bioinformatics That interface isn't a very user friendly 'long term' solution, but its good if you just want to stick your head in and say hi. > > The main question about the system that I have is this, I was > > wondering why the registration of OpenWetWare is so restrictive - How > > come you don't allow freer editing of pages and content? Perhaps you > > benefit from having more control over your users and more 'restricted' > > content, however, the success of Wikipedia suggests that 'the more the > > better'. I know registration is only a few clicks, along with a slight > > delay, but that will put a lot of people off. Perhaps you think it is > > better to exclude such 'casual' users, but I don't think it is good > > policy. I would like to see more 'open' access to all the features of > > the site. > > Interesting thoughts. Basically it boils down to the target audience of OWW > which is more along the lines of professional scientists and students of > science rather than people casually interested in science. Of course anyone > is welcome to read and re-use the content of OWW, but we require > registration so that we have a solid provenance link between content and who > wrote it. This is because the information on OWW is primarily scientific in > nature - protocols, experimental plans, experimental data, etc. We take > this very seriously because we want the integrity of the data and associated > discussion on OWW to be as high as possible. I see this point. On this topic, I was wondering if you have investigated the idea of community rating features? This is something that I have been considering for the 'Introductome', but don't know really if its a good idea or how to do it. Its kind of in the domain of 'scientific literature reform', but you can imagine a system whereby authors write / rate pages, and author specific ratings 'flow' through this network to determine some overall domain specific 'impact' of an article. > We are even considering trying > to promote OWW contributions as cite-able material in which the current > scientific value system mandates a name to be associated with the content. Great idea. > We also have a slightly different article model than wikipedia - rather than > having one page per topic, we really have one page per person per topic. > That is, multiple researchers working on the same topic will have different > views on the topic that should all be equally represented. It makes things > different enough that we have to consider that when we talk about how OWW is > structured. That is good. Is this documented somewhere? Do you have policy that sets up this kind of article structure clearly? For example, for a given topic, I would like to see how many authors have contributed an article. > > I am still exploring the content of the site - there is a lot to look > > at, and for a newbie like me, a lot to take in! It is really great to > > find such a mature project like this, and I am very much enjoying > > moving around the site and finding new content. > > How are you finding stuff on the site? Internal search engine? Google? > Following Links? Recent Changes? - We would really appreciate feedback in > this area so that we can improve. Following links / Reading 'help pages'. Generally the more 'overviews' the better IMHO. I find that Recent Changes is useful to see if a site is 'live', but it isn't very informative overall. I like the Dynamic Page List extension, which lets people know when new articles / edits have occurred in a specific category, which is much more useful than an overall site 'recent changes'. I believe Semantic MediaWiki is designed to be a non-messy version of DPL. > Thanks again, Thanks for the nice reply! Dan. > > Julius > OWW Outreach Chair > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- hello From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 14:24:40 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:24:40 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <7c085c480802101135u5d77e5a1nfda536b72894d9b5@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <7c085c480802082030i5360949cm897be907eb0ec667@mail.gmail.com> <8F8D31D6-9BEC-4034-B738-F496C4FE2F61@younglucks.com> <8763wxvg1n.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <26428aaa0802100840m6667b87ha36ed5588e3c6ca0@mail.gmail.com> <377C154E-86AF-4087-A492-F8782D78E124@gmail.com> <7c085c480802101135u5d77e5a1nfda536b72894d9b5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802131124g3b883b2bvdb7bd735d11aa71c@mail.gmail.com> Maybe an interesting graphic will help. Like using that cool box for counting cell cultures that Ty and Felix resurrected. We can have a webcam focussed on it. We can use the actual counter on it to display the total people on the site. I'm nothing if I'm not retro at heart. A culture plate with a little electrode to increment a mechanical counter. I think we really need to come up with a great way to showcase what must be the most interesting piece of equipment in Endy Lab. Now that those water filled slime thingees are broken... On Feb 10, 2008 2:35 PM, Jason Kelly wrote: > I'd actually be surprised if there are ever a lot of people logged in > to edit at the same time. I'm not sure exactly what the typical usage > pattern looks like for OWW members, but I'm guessing many people go to > the site to check a couple things, make a quick edit or two, and then > leave. Better publication of who is logged in currently might actually > give folks more reason to hang around though. cool feature for sure, > will be neat to watch it. > > thanks, > jason > > On Feb 10, 2008 2:13 PM, julius.lucks wrote: > > Hey Bill, > > > > This is really cool. The formatting of the page needs a little bit of > work > > I think, but certainly something very useful to have. > > > > It is amazing how few people are logged in on a sunday! > > > > Julius > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Please Reply to My Permanent Address: julius at younglucks.com > > http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 10, 2008, at 8:40 AM, Bill F wrote: > > I've installed an extension that I'd looked at before but never used. > > > > Check it out here: > > > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Sandbox1 > > > > This is a "current online users" list. The first version is pretty > simple. > > All it shows is the IP address (I added for debugging) and the username. > The > > anonymous users aren't displayed but the total counts of both the > anonymous > > and registered users is. > > > > The list can be formatted as is required. Anything in the User's > preference > > page can be included. > > > > To put the list on another page, just use the tag: > > > > > > > > There's a new table in the database called 'online'. Currently the table > > contains the timestamp, ip address, and the username of each logged in > user. > > > > I have some ideas, based upon some of the comments of late, about what > we > > can do with this. One thing is to extend it to also contain the online > chat > > status. I'd like to head what other people think. > > > > We can also extend it to show a view of whos is logged into the private > > wikis or who is currently logged into WordPress MU and at least display > the > > total number of users of that system. > > > > Let me know what you think. Try logging in and out and see if the page > > changes. It seems to be working pretty well. > > > > Thanks. > > > > B. > > > > > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 6:57 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > > > > > > > I've simply removed the extra chat tabs from all pages. This gets > > > rid of the page specific chat rooms. We can simply add a link to > > > Special:Chat anywhere like the sidebar. This still allows people > > > to jump into arbitrary rooms with something like > > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat/random > > > > > > I personally think an IRC backend with a web/php front end would > > > be the ideal combination. > > > > > > > > > > I think this is a good idea. In general the IRC model seems to work > > > > great - one main chat room with the ability to have a private > one-on- > > > > one chat if you want. > > > > > > > > J > > > > > > > > Please Reply to julius at younglucks.com > > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 8:30 PM, "Jason Kelly" wrote: > > > > > > > >> One thing that might improve the chat would be to just have the > > > >> "lounge", and not have individual chat pages for different wiki > pages. > > > >> That way anyone who clicks the chat button ends up in the same > place. > > > >> > > > >> If chat volume ever got so high it was confusing we could go back > to > > > >> the many chat room option, but just having one chat room would > > > >> increase the likelihood of people bumping into each other. > > > >> > > > >> What do people think? Would anyone care if the page-specific chat > > > >> rooms disappeared? > > > > > > -- > > > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/466896b2/attachment.htm From hoatlinm at ohsu.edu Wed Feb 13 14:24:04 2008 From: hoatlinm at ohsu.edu (Maureen Hoatlin) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:24:04 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] [OWW-SC] First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est In-Reply-To: Message-ID: HI All, Yes, let me know about those brownies so I can scale up! I will have to serve, eat and run as I have another date at 12:30. I think it would be great if we could discuss how to get more scientific collaborations in the community going via OWW, if that is a focus we want. -Maureen On 2/13/08 10:49 AM, "John Cumbers" wrote: > Hi all, > First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est > http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/09/oww-action-hour-thursday-14th-feb-no > on-est/#comments > Meeting place: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat > You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, Thu 14th Feb, > noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the steering committee will be > on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with you about what's > going on around the site. It's the first one, and our attempt at creating a > bit more of a real time community that meets more than just once a month by > phone. We'll 'meet' in the chat room on the main page. Maureen is making > brownies (is that correct?) so add your name in the comments if you are coming > so she can plan accordingly. > > Cheers, > > John > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/017fe373/attachment.htm From julius at younglucks.com Wed Feb 13 15:29:49 2008 From: julius at younglucks.com (Julius Lucks) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:29:49 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Hello list! (I'm new) In-Reply-To: <2c8757af0802131106r450bf8a4p267a0dde91ea49e4@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <566d890b0802081544v7db481f7wf7d73d09d5db3bd6@mail.gmail.com> <2c8757af0802131106r450bf8a4p267a0dde91ea49e4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <566d890b0802131229n6155e1f5ic7da3c142cf05728@mail.gmail.com> > > > > > Interesting thoughts. Basically it boils down to the target audience of > OWW > > which is more along the lines of professional scientists and students of > > science rather than people casually interested in science. Of course > anyone > > is welcome to read and re-use the content of OWW, but we require > > registration so that we have a solid provenance link between content and > who > > wrote it. This is because the information on OWW is primarily > scientific in > > nature - protocols, experimental plans, experimental data, etc. We take > > this very seriously because we want the integrity of the data and > associated > > discussion on OWW to be as high as possible. > > I see this point. > > On this topic, I was wondering if you have investigated the idea of > community rating features? This is something that I have been > considering for the 'Introductome', but don't know really if its a > good idea or how to do it. Its kind of in the domain of 'scientific > literature reform', but you can imagine a system whereby authors write > / rate pages, and author specific ratings 'flow' through this network > to determine some overall domain specific 'impact' of an article. > Yes - we have actually thought a lot about it. We even got Reddit to create oww.reddit.com, but it did not really take off (and it looks like it is down - probably due to inactivity.) We have been kicking around the idea for about a year and a half, and it's current incarnation has to do with publishing efforts on OWW. See the recent SC blog post for that discussion: http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/03/what-would-be-your-top-5-priorities-from-a-new-style-publishing-system/ > > > We also have a slightly different article model than wikipedia - rather > than > > having one page per topic, we really have one page per person per topic. > > That is, multiple researchers working on the same topic will have > different > > views on the topic that should all be equally represented. It makes > things > > different enough that we have to consider that when we talk about how > OWW is > > structured. > > That is good. Is this documented somewhere? Do you have policy that > sets up this kind of article structure clearly? For example, for a > given topic, I would like to see how many authors have contributed an > article. This is an anecdotal observation on my part - not a hard and fast rule or policy. What you suggest is probably going to end up being implemented by some sort of semantic wiki extension, but that still needs to be fleshed out. One of the things we need to work on in general is the 'sense of community' in OWW so that people can easily find out who is working on what. > > > > > > > Julius > > OWW Outreach Chair > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > hello > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/59346045/attachment.htm From johncumbers at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 17:39:40 2008 From: johncumbers at gmail.com (John Cumbers) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:39:40 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] [OWW-SC] First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: sounds good, I'd also like people to think more about the publishing requirements before the publishing teleconf. again next Thu. http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/03/what-would-be-your-top-5-priorities-from-a-new-style-publishing-system/ As this is the first one of these, I guess let's just see how it goes, sounds like multiple chat windows might be useful so that we can multitask... cheers, John On Feb 13, 2008 2:24 PM, Maureen Hoatlin wrote: > HI All, > > Yes, let me know about those brownies so I can scale up! I will have to > serve, eat and run as I have another date at 12:30. > > I think it would be great if we could discuss how to get more scientific > collaborations in the community going via OWW, if that is a focus we want. > -Maureen > > > On 2/13/08 10:49 AM, "John Cumbers" wrote: > > Hi all, > First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est > > http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/09/oww-action-hour-thursday-14th-feb-noon-est/#comments > Meeting place: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat > You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, Thu 14th > Feb, noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the steering committee will > be on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with you about > what's going on around the site. It's the first one, and our attempt at > creating a bit more of a real time community that meets more than just once > a month by phone. We'll 'meet' in the chat room on the main page. Maureen > is making brownies (is that correct?) so add your name in the comments if > you are coming so she can plan accordingly. > > Cheers, > > John > > > -- John Cumbers, Graduate Student Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry Biology and Medicine Brown University, Box G-W Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/8bcdf763/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 17:48:06 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:48:06 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] [OWW-SC] First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <26428aaa0802131448t5ac16fffpd17f71d65d8f0e9e@mail.gmail.com> Speak for yourself, John. I can't effectively multitask with one. It geometrically degrades as I increase windows. On Feb 13, 2008 5:39 PM, John Cumbers wrote: > sounds good, I'd also like people to think more about the publishing > requirements before the publishing teleconf. again next Thu. > http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/03/what-would-be-your-top-5-priorities-from-a-new-style-publishing-system/ > As this is the first one of these, I guess let's just see how it goes, > sounds like multiple chat windows might be useful so that we can > multitask... > > cheers, > John > > > On Feb 13, 2008 2:24 PM, Maureen Hoatlin wrote: > > > HI All, > > > > Yes, let me know about those brownies so I can scale up! I will have to > > serve, eat and run as I have another date at 12:30. > > > > I think it would be great if we could discuss how to get more scientific > > collaborations in the community going via OWW, if that is a focus we want. > > -Maureen > > > > > > On 2/13/08 10:49 AM, "John Cumbers" wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > First oww-action-hour tomorrow-Thursday-14th-Feb-noon-est > > > > http://blog.openwetware.org/sc/2008/02/09/oww-action-hour-thursday-14th-feb-noon-est/#comments > > Meeting place: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat > > You may be interested in the first 'OWW action hour' next week, Thu 14th > > Feb, noon-1pm EST. Where a bunch of people from the steering committee will > > be on-line and either completing their actions or chatting with you about > > what's going on around the site. It's the first one, and our attempt at > > creating a bit more of a real time community that meets more than just once > > a month by phone. We'll 'meet' in the chat room on the main page. Maureen > > is making brownies (is that correct?) so add your name in the comments if > > you are coming so she can plan accordingly. > > > > Cheers, > > > > John > > > > > > > > > -- > John Cumbers, Graduate Student > Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry > Biology and Medicine > Brown University, Box G-W > Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA > Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 > UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Steering Committee Mailing List > sc at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-sc > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/61d60156/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 18:14:24 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:14:24 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Minimal Google "Local Search" is now available for testing Message-ID: <26428aaa0802131514t11b51d93j8fac6b7ed64d79ff@mail.gmail.com> (This page can be found at the following URL: http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Software/Projects/Local_Search) The Local Search feature is accessed via a template: There currently are no arguments required. Just drop in the tag and you have a local search box. It's not elegant but it works pretty well. {{GoogleSearch}} Please post any comments on the following discussion page: http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Software/Projects/Local_Search/Discussion Please use this as the way you deploy the search. If you look inside of it, you will note that there is a single parser tag, . Please use the template rather than the tag. As i add aditional parameters, I'll continue to support the template. Just place the following tag anywhere in a page hierarchy and it will create a search box that will only search the hierarchically descending pages. Thanks once more to Austin for suggesting this approach. And thanks to Google for religiously searching OWW on a regular basis to make it possible. There are a few enhancement I'm going to add next. 1. When you hit search with nothing in the box, Google currently will return all of the pages. This isn't a bad thing but it's not necessary. Instead, hitting search with nothing in the search box will do..... nothing! 2. This won't immeiately work for private wikis. I'm adding support so that it will locate the current website next. This isn't a big deal but it's useful enough that Barry may want to use it in his private wiki and currently won't be abe to. 3. Google provides a more exensive Javascript library to allow more complex search features. I'll add support for this when I have time. This is a low priority. 4. Currently,the pages returned are displayed on Google's website. I want to redirect the content back to a local OWW page so that there won't be a jarring experience of searcing and leaving then returning. I can use an html iframe for this but I hate to do this for security reasons. The good thing is that the results will always be limited to OWW so this may not be a huge problem. After clearing this up, I'll take my 'experience' in seeing how people use this back to the native OWW search engine and see if we can better handle results in a more timely manner. Thanks. B. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/98db522c/attachment.htm From ilyas at MIT.EDU Wed Feb 13 18:34:51 2008 From: ilyas at MIT.EDU (Ilya Sytchev) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:34:51 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat In-Reply-To: <213fc43b0802130747m231b650an9f5003f67f03ecef@mail.gmail.com> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <87prv16kkq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802130747m231b650an9f5003f67f03ecef@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47B37E9B.6010809@mit.edu> It works well for me in Adium (http://www.adiumx.com/). Ricardo Vidal wrote: > I've got it all working pretty well using Pidgin (www.pidgin.im > ) > > Great work Austin :) > > On Feb 13, 2008 1:40 PM, Austin Che > wrote: > > > And here's a web-based ajax jabber client that can likely be used > as a replacement for phpfreechat: > http://jwchat.org/ > > It works for me on firefox but not opera. Server openwetware.org > , > username/password as normal. > > > I've installed a jabber server on openwetware for testing > > (openfire). Here's what you need to do: > > - log in to oww > > - go to your preferences and change your password (you can > set new > > equal to old password) and save > > - now use any jabber client and connect to your oww username with > > spaces replaced by underscored and all lowercased at the domain > > openwetware.org , e.g. > "austin_j._che at openwetware.org > " with your > > password being your oww password > > - chat away > > > > For chat rooms, the service is called > conference.openwetware.org > > so you can join arbitrary rooms like > > lounge at conference.openwetware.org > > > > > I've installed some plugins also that should also allow you to > > talk with other services like AIM, Yahoo, etc. > > -- > Austin Che > (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > -- > Ricardo Vidal > e: rvidal at gmail.com > w: http://my.biotechlife.net > skype: icky_bu > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From ilyas at MIT.EDU Wed Feb 13 23:22:13 2008 From: ilyas at MIT.EDU (Ilya Sytchev) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 23:22:13 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Chat In-Reply-To: <47B37E9B.6010809@mit.edu> References: <2c8757af0802081336x2bc49215q91e8ab8ecfd08327@mail.gmail.com> <200802082235.05012.kanzure@gmail.com> <26428aaa0802100913r57d4fcbbs19e88f45fde00e11@mail.gmail.com> <200802101128.13541.kanzure@gmail.com> <47B2204E.5040105@mit.edu> <87zlu5fzjv.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <87prv16kkq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802130747m231b650an9f5003f67f03ecef@mail.gmail.com> <47B37E9B.6010809@mit.edu> Message-ID: <47B3C1F5.6060809@mit.edu> Btw, I think we should turn off the "welcome message" (Share your science in the lounge at conference.openwetware.org chat room.) It pops up every time you get connected or jabber server is restarted - becomes quite annoying after a few times. Instead, we should provide a help page, like this one: http://www.ietf.org/meetings/text_conf.html Ilya Sytchev wrote: > It works well for me in Adium (http://www.adiumx.com/). > > > Ricardo Vidal wrote: >> I've got it all working pretty well using Pidgin (www.pidgin.im >> ) >> >> Great work Austin :) >> >> On Feb 13, 2008 1:40 PM, Austin Che > > wrote: >> >> >> And here's a web-based ajax jabber client that can likely be used >> as a replacement for phpfreechat: >> http://jwchat.org/ >> >> It works for me on firefox but not opera. Server openwetware.org >> , >> username/password as normal. >> >> > I've installed a jabber server on openwetware for testing >> > (openfire). Here's what you need to do: >> > - log in to oww >> > - go to your preferences and change your password (you can >> set new >> > equal to old password) and save >> > - now use any jabber client and connect to your oww username with >> > spaces replaced by underscored and all lowercased at the domain >> > openwetware.org , e.g. >> "austin_j._che at openwetware.org >> " with your >> > password being your oww password >> > - chat away >> > >> > For chat rooms, the service is called >> conference.openwetware.org >> > so you can join arbitrary rooms like >> > lounge at conference.openwetware.org >> >> > >> > I've installed some plugins also that should also allow you to >> > talk with other services like AIM, Yahoo, etc. >> >> -- >> Austin Che > > (617)253-5899 >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >> discuss at openwetware.org >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Ricardo Vidal >> e: rvidal at gmail.com >> w: http://my.biotechlife.net >> skype: icky_bu >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >> discuss at openwetware.org >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From jasonk at MIT.EDU Wed Feb 13 23:47:14 2008 From: jasonk at MIT.EDU (Jason Kelly) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 23:47:14 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] merge discuss and sc list? Message-ID: <7c085c480802132047k1bdac712m4d0379fa86b05ae8@mail.gmail.com> Hi folks, I'd like to propose a merging of the discuss at oww and sc at oww lists. Most of the emails on the SC list aren't exclusively "SC business" (whatever that means), and I think having the multiple lists prevents new OWW users who only sign up for the discuss list from finding out what's going on in the OWW community (since most of that comes up on SC list). For instance, recent emails from Dan to the discuss list saying he didn't know about SC meeting details. The SC list has 47 members. The discuss list has 65 members. There are 18 people that are on SC list but not on the discuss list, so we'd merge them into discuss. (Thanks ilya for stats) Alternatively, we can be more diligent about emailing community-related things to the discuss list, but it just seems easier to merge. If the traffic gets too bad we could always start an "announce" list or a list for a particular subtopic that had lots of traffic. What do people think? Thanks, jason From macowell at gmail.com Wed Feb 13 23:57:41 2008 From: macowell at gmail.com (Mackenzie Cowell) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 23:57:41 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] merge discuss and sc list? In-Reply-To: <7c085c480802132047k1bdac712m4d0379fa86b05ae8@mail.gmail.com> References: <7c085c480802132047k1bdac712m4d0379fa86b05ae8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <54746a3f0802132057ydeeb47fxbc1d109ae2f4736c@mail.gmail.com> I second this idea. I was completely clueless about the discuss list until this afternoon, when austin made incidental comment about an email he had sent to it. I don't think there is a good practical reason to keep them separated at this point. We can always reestablish an SC list if there are lots of SC-only topics that would otherwise pollute the discuss list. mac On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Jason Kelly wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'd like to propose a merging of the discuss at oww and sc at oww lists. > Most of the emails on the SC list aren't exclusively "SC business" > (whatever that means), and I think having the multiple lists prevents > new OWW users who only sign up for the discuss list from finding out > what's going on in the OWW community (since most of that comes up on > SC list). For instance, recent emails from Dan to the discuss list > saying he didn't know about SC meeting details. > > The SC list has 47 members. The discuss list has 65 members. There > are 18 people that are on SC list but not on the discuss list, so we'd > merge them into discuss. (Thanks ilya for stats) > > Alternatively, we can be more diligent about emailing > community-related things to the discuss list, but it just seems easier > to merge. If the traffic gets too bad we could always start an > "announce" list or a list for a particular subtopic that had lots of > traffic. > > What do people think? > > Thanks, > jason > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -- Mac Cowell iGEM Coordinator igem.org 231.313.9062 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080213/fa418310/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Thu Feb 14 09:18:33 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:18:33 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] [OWW-SC] merge discuss and sc list? In-Reply-To: <54746a3f0802132057ydeeb47fxbc1d109ae2f4736c@mail.gmail.com> References: <7c085c480802132047k1bdac712m4d0379fa86b05ae8@mail.gmail.com> <54746a3f0802132057ydeeb47fxbc1d109ae2f4736c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802140618h55477000p46c0d542125d64e@mail.gmail.com> Destructive progress. It works for me... B. On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Mackenzie Cowell wrote: > I second this idea. > I was completely clueless about the discuss list until this afternoon, > when austin made incidental comment about an email he had sent to it. I > don't think there is a good practical reason to keep them separated at this > point. We can always reestablish an SC list if there are lots of SC-only > topics that would otherwise pollute the discuss list. > > mac > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Jason Kelly wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > I'd like to propose a merging of the discuss at oww and sc at oww lists. > > Most of the emails on the SC list aren't exclusively "SC business" > > (whatever that means), and I think having the multiple lists prevents > > new OWW users who only sign up for the discuss list from finding out > > what's going on in the OWW community (since most of that comes up on > > SC list). For instance, recent emails from Dan to the discuss list > > saying he didn't know about SC meeting details. > > > > The SC list has 47 members. The discuss list has 65 members. There > > are 18 people that are on SC list but not on the discuss list, so we'd > > merge them into discuss. (Thanks ilya for stats) > > > > Alternatively, we can be more diligent about emailing > > community-related things to the discuss list, but it just seems easier > > to merge. If the traffic gets too bad we could always start an > > "announce" list or a list for a particular subtopic that had lots of > > traffic. > > > > What do people think? > > > > Thanks, > > jason > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > -- > Mac Cowell > iGEM Coordinator > igem.org > 231.313.9062 > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Steering Committee Mailing List > sc at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-sc > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080214/7f418d7b/attachment.htm From johncumbers at gmail.com Thu Feb 14 11:27:35 2008 From: johncumbers at gmail.com (John Cumbers) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:27:35 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] T minus 35 mins to OWW ACTION HOUR. http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat Message-ID: T minus 35 mins to OWW ACTION HOUR. http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Chat I can hardly contain my excitement. Noon EST. Cheers, John -- John Cumbers, Graduate Student Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, and Biochemistry Biology and Medicine Brown University, Box G-W Providence, Rhode Island, 02912, USA Tel USA: +1 401 523 8190, Fax: +1 401 863-2166 UK to USA: 0207 617 7824 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080214/eb28de67/attachment.htm From austin at csail.mit.edu Fri Feb 15 12:57:14 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:57:14 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] online chat Message-ID: <87r6feumpx.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Working online chat. Log in with your jabber username/password, server openwetware.org http://openwetware.org:8080/red5/syabel.html video/audio also supported! http://openwetware.org:8080/red5/red5.html -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From jasonk at MIT.EDU Fri Feb 15 13:05:22 2008 From: jasonk at MIT.EDU (Jason Kelly) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:05:22 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Fwd: merge discuss and sc list? In-Reply-To: <2cbee05b0802140358m5b159eebp7aa9930dd91e2234@mail.gmail.com> References: <7c085c480802132047k1bdac712m4d0379fa86b05ae8@mail.gmail.com> <54746a3f0802132057ydeeb47fxbc1d109ae2f4736c@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802140358m5b159eebp7aa9930dd91e2234@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7c085c480802151005g78c33d0fp59629e07837aef26@mail.gmail.com> OK, that seems like consensus. The lists have been merged (thanks ilya). Please just use discuss at openwetware.org from now on. thanks, jason ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Lorrie LeJeune Date: Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 6:58 AM Subject: Re: [OWW-Discuss] merge discuss and sc list? To: Jason Kelly I agree. There seems to be a lot of topical overlap, so a merged list will make it easier to follow the various discussion threads. --Lorrie On 2/13/08, Mackenzie Cowell wrote: > I second this idea. > > I was completely clueless about the discuss list until this afternoon, when > austin made incidental comment about an email he had sent to it. I don't > think there is a good practical reason to keep them separated at this point. > We can always reestablish an SC list if there are lots of SC-only topics > that would otherwise pollute the discuss list. > > mac > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Jason Kelly wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > I'd like to propose a merging of the discuss at oww and sc at oww lists. > > Most of the emails on the SC list aren't exclusively "SC business" > > (whatever that means), and I think having the multiple lists prevents > > new OWW users who only sign up for the discuss list from finding out > > what's going on in the OWW community (since most of that comes up on > > SC list). For instance, recent emails from Dan to the discuss list > > saying he didn't know about SC meeting details. > > > > The SC list has 47 members. The discuss list has 65 members. There > > are 18 people that are on SC list but not on the discuss list, so we'd > > merge them into discuss. (Thanks ilya for stats) > > > > Alternatively, we can be more diligent about emailing > > community-related things to the discuss list, but it just seems easier > > to merge. If the traffic gets too bad we could always start an > > "announce" list or a list for a particular subtopic that had lots of > > traffic. > > > > What do people think? > > > > Thanks, > > jason > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > -- > Mac Cowell > iGEM Coordinator > igem.org > 231.313.9062 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > From bill.altmail at gmail.com Fri Feb 15 21:13:49 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:13:49 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Search improvements are coming Message-ID: <26428aaa0802151813q55b0019at35c7cf1b2c579a37@mail.gmail.com> I just finished off a min-overhaul of the OpenWetWare full text search. The changes are still not deployed in the main OWW server but I will do it this weekend. I managed to find a way to rewrite the search to allow a tird option on the full text search box on the left hand margin of MediaWiki, also known as the sidebar. The button needs a better label but what it does is pretty clear. when you use the large new button on the bottom, the search is done only on pages beginning with the current page. As an example, if you're working on your Lab Notebook, your search will be constrained only to the current level of the Notebook you are working on. Here's an example: Assume I'm in my Lab Notebook: Notebook:Bill Flanagan If I search from that page, anything in the underlying pages will be returned. No other documents will be searched for other Notebooks or for the main OpenWetWare server. I'm going to place intermediate pages in the Lab Notebook for months and years; you'll be able to look at a calendar for the month or the year and also search from there to constrain your search to entries for that period of time. Like the Google MediaWiki search tag I created ("" or "Page", there's also a new "drop-in" search button to allow you to add a search on any page that will return results constrained to the target page. For instance, I can go to my user page, "User:Bill Flanagan" and place a search on that page for my Lab Notebook. It would look like this: Notebook:Bill Flanagan Searching with this entry field will show a list of pages in my lab notebook. When I want to return, a new item is on the search result page to return me to the "User:Bill Flanagan" page where I started from. The next level of integration will be a bit more interesting. OK. I'm easilly amused. So what. LOL. I am going to build a search aggregation class that will allow you to create a list of base pags that I want to roll into a single search. This will mean that if you run a lab, all of the researchers will be able to look at searches of their colleagues notebooks. There are a few other "micro-community" building exercises I'm starting in on to add more cohesion to collaborators working within OpenWetWare. There are a few other search activities I think we should consider. 1. Boolean searched. There's no way to say "show me all of the MIT pages but none with pictures on them". Maybe nobody ever wants to say something like this. But it's a pretty useful idea: constrain search and move the MW search to be something that is a tad more useful than using the Yellow Pages. And I mean the book! The "search from here" feature is a trivial example of such a search. 2. Wild-card searches There are no ways to say "show me all of the entries from any lab. If I know that labs always have the word, "lab" in their name, I should be able to use this info. MediaWiki makes is so hard to do something like that. But my recent foray into the bowels of OWW has brought me to understand how this can be done. I hope we can do this before I go crazy waiting for my current search to return any useful information. If anyone knows of other "common sense" features that could be added to search that you covet but have not ever been able to access before, please let me know . I'll send out a more detailed description of the recent changes to search next week. But I will have the new stuff on OpenWetWare this weekend. Thanks. Bill The Google search gadget I wrote earlier in the week gave me the sense of how to make it work with the regular mediawiki search engine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080215/6121f47b/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Sat Feb 16 20:04:58 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 20:04:58 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Search changes are now enabled in OWW Message-ID: <26428aaa0802161704jbf82bd8of77557ec477d4fdb@mail.gmail.com> I'll update this in the docs but here's the changes. 1. There's a new search button. It's under the current "search" and "go" buttons. If you use the new button ("Search From Page"), the current page will be used as a starting point for all searches. 2. When you look at the results, you'll note that there's a new line at the top of the form. It identifies what page the search was "based" upon as well as providing a way to go back to that page. Clicking on the label returns you to the 'base' page. 3. The base page is now available at the bottom of the page to change if you want to search from a different page. 4. Clicking through the search pages will continue to allow you to use explore the results from the base page. All of the page links reflect this. In other words, the page won't forget that you are searching a subset of the pages. But every page view also allows you to reset the search term, the base page, or the namespaces at the bottom of thee page. 5. This same capability is available in a tag similar to the one I did earlier in the week for Google. 6. The name of the tag is "". 7. You can specify that the tag to either search with the current page as the 'base page' or you can specify an alternate page like this: OpenWetWare:Software 8. If the namespace of the page to be used as the base page is not in the default namespace, you need to include it between the tags. 9. The changes have been done in a way that no mods to the underlying MediaWiki components, with one exception. A. The current SpecialSearch.php page used to display the output from the search needs to be modified. The mods will allow the changes made on OpenWetWare.php to support Google search. 10. There also is a change in search in general. Wildcard searches (a search term ending in an asterisk) are now supported. I may have to tweak this a bit but it does make search more useful. Thanks. B. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080216/c9b8a686/attachment.htm From lorrielejeune at gmail.com Fri Feb 22 16:08:37 2008 From: lorrielejeune at gmail.com (Lorrie LeJeune) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:08:37 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Community project brainstorming meeting Message-ID: <6ac0a26a0802221308i38b8d648v29c872959c585405@mail.gmail.com> Hi Folks, I'd like to continue brainstorming ideas for activating the community. This includes bringing on new users and pumping up existing users. Who would be up for a conf. call meeting on Tuesday or Tursday of next week at 12 noon EST? Jason has collected material that was scattered over the site and put it here: http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Community/Project_brainstorming#Information_contribution Please take a look and add your comments. If we have takers for Tuesday or Thursday of next week I'll organize a call. --Lorrie -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080222/86de8cd7/attachment.htm From jasonk at MIT.EDU Fri Feb 22 16:31:45 2008 From: jasonk at MIT.EDU (Jason Kelly) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:31:45 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Community project brainstorming meeting In-Reply-To: <6ac0a26a0802221308i38b8d648v29c872959c585405@mail.gmail.com> References: <6ac0a26a0802221308i38b8d648v29c872959c585405@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7c085c480802221331l72457443j9e721064485edb8b@mail.gmail.com> p.s. I just made up the categories to try organize people's thinking on this. Feel free to add new ones / delete mine, nothing is in stone. General idea is to have a meeting similar to the one we had when bill came on board to brainstorm technical features to implement on the site. Except this meeting would be to brainstorm "community features" - for instance the SC is a community feature, as are stickers, "getting started" help pages, etc. anyway, please add/edit, brainstorm! i think we can come up with some good stuff here that lots of people could start plugging into. http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Community/Project_brainstorming On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Lorrie LeJeune wrote: > Hi Folks, > I'd like to continue brainstorming ideas for activating the community. This > includes bringing on new users and pumping up existing users. Who would be > up for a conf. call meeting on Tuesday or Tursday of next week at 12 noon > EST? > > Jason has collected material that was scattered over the site and put it > here: > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Community/Project_brainstorming#Information_contribution > > Please take a look and add your comments. If we have takers for Tuesday or > Thursday of next week I'll organize a call. > > --Lorrie > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > From bill.altmail at gmail.com Sun Feb 24 14:39:21 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:39:21 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... Message-ID: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> I've put together a small application that allows anyone to send an invitation to join OpenWetWare. It's not online yet but the form and mail message send is ready to go. I'll enable it for testing when we agree on what it needs to do. This follows the way new registrations are received for OpenWetWare. 1. There's a page called "OpenWetWare:Invite": http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Invite The form and message are part of a standard wiki page and can be edited by any member unless we choose to protect it. 2. This sends out a message via UMS. The contents of this currently are implemented as a template in the list of UMS options. This is the current text of the message. It's in the UMS system and not currently an OWW page. That limits who edits it to folks on the OWW Admin list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A current member of the OpenWetWare.org community has invited you to join. What is OpenWetWare? OpenWetWare is an effort to promote the sharing of information, know-how, and wisdom among researchers and groups who are working in biology & biological engineering. Learn more about us. If you would like edit access, would be interested in helping out, or want your lab website hosted on OpenWetWare, please join us. How do I sign up? If you're interested, please follow the link below where you can sign up: http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:How_to_join What if I just want to check it out before signing up? Just visit out main page at http://openwetware.org You can look at anything the site has to offer. We do require you to sign up before you can start building your own lab, personal lab notebook, or interacting with other OpenWetWare members. What if I have questions before I sign up? We look forward to answering any questions you might have. Submit your questions here: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Special:Contact Thanks for your interest. We're looking forward to your joining us. OpenWetWare.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I think this may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few questions. A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person who submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an additional comment? F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We can do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending the invitation? Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and would make for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also gives us quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation is acted upon. Any comments are appreciated. Bill Flanagan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080224/cc400632/attachment.htm From austin at csail.mit.edu Sun Feb 24 15:41:01 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 15:41:01 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> (Bill F.'s message of "Sun, 24 Feb 2008 14:39:21 -0500") References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I think this > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few questions. > > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? Maybe on the how to join page. > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person who > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique cookie or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be easier to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, etc.) > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an additional > comment? Can't think of why not. > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We can > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending the > invitation? Sure why not. > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and would make > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also gives us > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation is > acted upon. Might as well record it if possible. I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at motivating people to do things in communities. We can do something like the weighted sum of: - number of invited people - total number of edits - number of articles created - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list - etc. -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From jasonk at MIT.EDU Sun Feb 24 15:46:55 2008 From: jasonk at MIT.EDU (Jason Kelly) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 15:46:55 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We can > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > They probably can just send it to a mailing list. I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you want to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need to put in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. thanks, jason On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I think this > > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few questions. > > > > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? > > Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > > > > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? > > Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > > > > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? > > Maybe on the how to join page. > > > > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person who > > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? > > That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique cookie > or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be easier > to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the > inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to > generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration > form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, etc.) > > > > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an additional > > comment? > > Can't think of why not. > > > > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We can > > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > > > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending the > > invitation? > > Sure why not. > > > > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and would make > > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also gives us > > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation is > > acted upon. > > Might as well record it if possible. > > I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers > indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at > motivating people to do things in communities. We can do something > like the weighted sum of: > - number of invited people > - total number of edits > - number of articles created > - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list > - etc. > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > From bill.altmail at gmail.com Sun Feb 24 16:08:33 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:08:33 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802241308j524c03cw927f2054b1a8d6e0@mail.gmail.com> 1. I'll add multiple email address slots. 2. I'll drop the user name. 3. I'll add a line for them to add a comment. On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Jason Kelly wrote: > > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We > can > > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > > They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you want > to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need to put > in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. > > cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. > > thanks, > jason > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > > > > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I > think this > > > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few > questions. > > > > > > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? > > > > Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > > > > > > > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? > > > > Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > > > > > > > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? > > > > Maybe on the how to join page. > > > > > > > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person > who > > > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? > > > > That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique cookie > > or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be easier > > to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the > > inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to > > generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration > > form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, > etc.) > > > > > > > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an > additional > > > comment? > > > > Can't think of why not. > > > > > > > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? > We can > > > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > > > They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > > > > > > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending > the > > > invitation? > > > > Sure why not. > > > > > > > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and > would make > > > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also > gives us > > > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation > is > > > acted upon. > > > > Might as well record it if possible. > > > > I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers > > indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at > > motivating people to do things in communities. We can do something > > like the weighted sum of: > > - number of invited people > > - total number of edits > > - number of articles created > > - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list > > - etc. > > > > -- > > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080224/9b0c2536/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Sun Feb 24 16:16:46 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:16:46 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802241316i52d76c18p454c6a4a5d02943e@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I think > this > > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few questions. > > > > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? > > Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > >>Excellent point. I should have thought of that before. > > > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? > > Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > >> Since they're logged in, I'll add it. I can use the template to fill in the username of the person sending the message in the text. > > > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? > > Maybe on the how to join page. >>Good place for now. > > > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person who > > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? > > That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique cookie > or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be easier > to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the > inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to > generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration > form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, etc.) > >>The email address is unique. I'll use it for now. If they join with a different email address, we lose. No big deal. >>We can also do the same thing that gets done via the email confirm: we put a token in that they can click on to register. When they click on it, we preload the email address and get the context that allows us to send the thank you message to the inviter. I've re-used the MediaWiki code to do this before. > > > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an > additional > > comment? > > Can't think of why not. > >>Done. > > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We > can > > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > >>I''m adding support for 5 addresses. Copy and past. > > > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending the > > invitation? > > Sure why not. > >>OK. > > > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and would > make > > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also gives > us > > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation is > > acted upon. > >> Database table is now present for invites. > > Might as well record it if possible. > > I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers > indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at > motivating people to do things in communities. We can do something > like the weighted sum of: > - number of invited people > - total number of edits > - number of articles created > - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list > - etc. > >> We need to talk about this. Sounds like a great idea. > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080224/ba3c8342/attachment.htm From ilyas at MIT.EDU Mon Feb 25 13:02:13 2008 From: ilyas at MIT.EDU (Ilya Sytchev) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:02:13 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> I think we need a simpler form. Here's a mock up of what I have in mind (fields borrowed from pandora.com): http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Ilya/Sandbox Jason Kelly wrote: >> F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We can >> do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you want > to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need to put > in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. > > cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. > > thanks, > jason > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che wrote: >> > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I think this >> > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few questions. >> > >> > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? >> >> Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. >> >> >> > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? >> >> Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. >> >> >> > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? >> >> Maybe on the how to join page. >> >> >> > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person who >> > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? >> >> That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique cookie >> or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be easier >> to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the >> inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to >> generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration >> form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, etc.) >> >> >> > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an additional >> > comment? >> >> Can't think of why not. >> >> >> > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We can >> > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. >> >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. >> >> >> > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending the >> > invitation? >> >> Sure why not. >> >> >> > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and would make >> > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also gives us >> > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation is >> > acted upon. >> >> Might as well record it if possible. >> >> I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers >> indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at >> motivating people to do things in communities. We can do something >> like the weighted sum of: >> - number of invited people >> - total number of edits >> - number of articles created >> - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list >> - etc. >> >> -- >> Austin Che (617)253-5899 >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >> discuss at openwetware.org >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >> > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From bill.altmail at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 13:03:52 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:03:52 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802251003i4c79ecb0t93bf80756bda3f4d@mail.gmail.com> I agree with this approach. That way there's no limit to the usercount to be added. Does everyone agree? I'll steal Ilya's form and use it instead of the one I'm using. B. On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Ilya Sytchev wrote: > I think we need a simpler form. Here's a mock up of what I have in mind > (fields borrowed from pandora.com): > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Ilya/Sandbox > > > Jason Kelly wrote: > >> F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We > can > >> do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > > > I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you want > > to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need to put > > in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. > > > > cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. > > > > thanks, > > jason > > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che > wrote: > >> > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I > think this > >> > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few > questions. > >> > > >> > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? > >> > >> Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > >> > >> > >> > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? > >> > >> Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > >> > >> > >> > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? > >> > >> Maybe on the how to join page. > >> > >> > >> > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person > who > >> > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? > >> > >> That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique cookie > >> or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be easier > >> to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the > >> inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to > >> generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration > >> form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, > etc.) > >> > >> > >> > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an > additional > >> > comment? > >> > >> Can't think of why not. > >> > >> > >> > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? > We can > >> > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > >> > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > >> > >> > >> > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending > the > >> > invitation? > >> > >> Sure why not. > >> > >> > >> > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and > would make > >> > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also > gives us > >> > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation > is > >> > acted upon. > >> > >> Might as well record it if possible. > >> > >> I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers > >> indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at > >> motivating people to do things in communities. We can do something > >> like the weighted sum of: > >> - number of invited people > >> - total number of edits > >> - number of articles created > >> - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list > >> - etc. > >> > >> -- > >> Austin Che (617)253-5899 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > >> discuss at openwetware.org > >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/4017380d/attachment.htm From rvidal at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 13:04:54 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:04:54 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> Message-ID: <213fc43b0802251004v6dc5e515v1dd29e85f46a4919@mail.gmail.com> Ilya, I prefer Ilya's option. As long as the field for emails doesn't break if an address is not introduced properly among others that are. On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Ilya Sytchev wrote: > I think we need a simpler form. Here's a mock up of what I have in mind > (fields borrowed from pandora.com): > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Ilya/Sandbox > > > Jason Kelly wrote: > >> F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? We > can > >> do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > > > I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you want > > to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need to put > > in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. > > > > cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. > > > > thanks, > > jason > > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che > wrote: > >> > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I > think this > >> > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few > questions. > >> > > >> > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? > >> > >> Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > >> > >> > >> > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? > >> > >> Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > >> > >> > >> > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? > >> > >> Maybe on the how to join page. > >> > >> > >> > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the person > who > >> > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? > >> > >> That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique cookie > >> or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be easier > >> to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the > >> inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to > >> generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration > >> form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, > etc.) > >> > >> > >> > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an > additional > >> > comment? > >> > >> Can't think of why not. > >> > >> > >> > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? > We can > >> > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > >> > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > >> > >> > >> > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person sending > the > >> > invitation? > >> > >> Sure why not. > >> > >> > >> > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and > would make > >> > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also > gives us > >> > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the inviation > is > >> > acted upon. > >> > >> Might as well record it if possible. > >> > >> I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers > >> indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at > >> motivating people to do things in communities. We can do something > >> like the weighted sum of: > >> - number of invited people > >> - total number of edits > >> - number of articles created > >> - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list > >> - etc. > >> > >> -- > >> Austin Che (617)253-5899 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > >> discuss at openwetware.org > >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/c6eb11f0/attachment.htm From austin at csail.mit.edu Mon Feb 25 14:43:49 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:43:49 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training Message-ID: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> This is a random suggestion from something I just saw another site have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led by Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members from that week are sent an email letting them know about it. They log in online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual tour of OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users just as they get on also. -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From rvidal at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 14:46:40 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:46:40 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training In-Reply-To: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> Would this virtual tour be something pre-recorded or is this something more like e-learning with interactivity? On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > This is a random suggestion from something I just saw another site > have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led by > Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members from that > week are sent an email letting them know about it. They log in > online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual tour of > OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users just as > they get on also. > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -- Ricardo Vidal rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net Skype: icky_bu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/86352c54/attachment.htm From enobarber at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 14:56:46 2008 From: enobarber at gmail.com (Reid Williams) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:56:46 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <213fc43b0802251004v6dc5e515v1dd29e85f46a4919@mail.gmail.com> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251004v6dc5e515v1dd29e85f46a4919@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I agree. I'd also add empty space between a form textbox and the following text. -reid On Feb 25, 2008, at 10:04 AM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: > Ilya, > > I prefer Ilya's option. As long as the field for emails doesn't > break if an address is not introduced properly among others that are. > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Ilya Sytchev wrote: > I think we need a simpler form. Here's a mock up of what I have in > mind > (fields borrowed from pandora.com): > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Ilya/Sandbox > > > Jason Kelly wrote: > >> F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one > person? We can > >> do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > > > I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you want > > to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need to > put > > in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. > > > > cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. > > > > thanks, > > jason > > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che > wrote: > >> > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being > sent. I think this > >> > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few > questions. > >> > > >> > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? > >> > >> Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > >> > >> > >> > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? > >> > >> Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > >> > >> > >> > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the > invitation? > >> > >> Maybe on the how to join page. > >> > >> > >> > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the > person who > >> > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? > >> > >> That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique > cookie > >> or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be > easier > >> to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the > >> inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to > >> generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the > registration > >> form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the > lab, etc.) > >> > >> > >> > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to > add an additional > >> > comment? > >> > >> Can't think of why not. > >> > >> > >> > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one > person? We can > >> > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one > name. > >> > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > >> > >> > >> > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person > sending the > >> > invitation? > >> > >> Sure why not. > >> > >> > >> > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement > and would make > >> > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It > also gives us > >> > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the > inviation is > >> > acted upon. > >> > >> Might as well record it if possible. > >> > >> I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' > numbers > >> indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at > >> motivating people to do things in communities. We can do > something > >> like the weighted sum of: > >> - number of invited people > >> - total number of edits > >> - number of articles created > >> - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list > >> - etc. > >> > >> -- > >> Austin Che (617)253-5899 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > >> discuss at openwetware.org > >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/1613dc45/attachment.htm From austin at csail.mit.edu Mon Feb 25 15:04:41 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:04:41 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training In-Reply-To: <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> (Ricardo Vidal's message of "Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:46:40 -0500") References: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <87r6f03iqu.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> It kind of defeats the purpose if it's pre-recorded but there could be some standard script, e.g. everyone go edit their user pages now. Everyone go look at the recent changes, hit diff to see what people changed, etc. > Would this virtual tour be something pre-recorded or is this something more > like e-learning with interactivity? > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Austin Che wrote: > >> >> This is a random suggestion from something I just saw another site >> have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led by >> Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members from that >> week are sent an email letting them know about it. They log in >> online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual tour of >> OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users just as >> they get on also. -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From rvidal at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 15:09:52 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:09:52 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training In-Reply-To: <87r6f03iqu.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> <87r6f03iqu.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <213fc43b0802251209n6afbe376i473e8ebd4035f226@mail.gmail.com> This could also be a package of tutorials lined up with the different steps. Make a screencast of each step and put them online on a nice page that could be emailed to new users. A starters pack, so to say. On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Austin Che wrote: > > It kind of defeats the purpose if it's pre-recorded but there > could be some standard script, e.g. everyone go edit their user > pages now. Everyone go look at the recent changes, hit diff to see > what people changed, etc. > > > Would this virtual tour be something pre-recorded or is this something > more > > like e-learning with interactivity? > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Austin Che > wrote: > > > >> > >> This is a random suggestion from something I just saw another site > >> have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led by > >> Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members from that > >> week are sent an email letting them know about it. They log in > >> online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual tour of > >> OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users just as > >> they get on also. > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -- Ricardo Vidal rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net Skype: icky_bu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/ad0d4242/attachment.htm From moltogatti at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 18:27:05 2008 From: moltogatti at gmail.com (Lorrie LeJeune) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:27:05 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training In-Reply-To: <2cbee05b0802251523q52f803d6t5bc1964dd0337a29@mail.gmail.com> References: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> <87r6f03iqu.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251209n6afbe376i473e8ebd4035f226@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802251523q52f803d6t5bc1964dd0337a29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2cbee05b0802251527r1f484c80k783b99a5905aa6a8@mail.gmail.com> Maybe we ultimately have both? That way people who can't dial in at the prearranged time can still access tutorial material. Either way, it'd be worth trying the live version just to see how many people actually join. The live tutorial could then be captured via screencast and edited into a finished archive... --Lorrie > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: > > > This could also be a package of tutorials lined up with the different > > steps. Make a screencast of each step and put them online on a nice page > > that could be emailed to new users. A starters pack, so to say. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Austin Che > > wrote: > > > > > > > > It kind of defeats the purpose if it's pre-recorded but there > > > could be some standard script, e.g. everyone go edit their user > > > pages now. Everyone go look at the recent changes, hit diff to see > > > what people changed, etc. > > > > > > > Would this virtual tour be something pre-recorded or is this > > > something more > > > > like e-learning with interactivity? > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Austin Che > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > >> This is a random suggestion from something I just saw another > > > site > > > >> have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led by > > > >> Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members from > > > that > > > >> week are sent an email letting them know about it. They log in > > > >> online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual tour > > > of > > > >> OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users just as > > > >> they get on also. > > > > > > -- > > > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Ricardo Vidal > > rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net > > Skype: icky_bu > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/9c82c5c5/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 20:59:24 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:59:24 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training In-Reply-To: <2cbee05b0802251527r1f484c80k783b99a5905aa6a8@mail.gmail.com> References: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> <87r6f03iqu.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251209n6afbe376i473e8ebd4035f226@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802251523q52f803d6t5bc1964dd0337a29@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802251527r1f484c80k783b99a5905aa6a8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802251759k7986a09g2ab7488b04a43040@mail.gmail.com> I like Ricardo's idea. We can link the tutorials to their User page when they log in or provide a link in the message itself to o directly to the tutorials. We can even go to HTML welcome messages if we want to provide for adding an intro photo or link. On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Lorrie LeJeune wrote: > Maybe we ultimately have both? That way people who can't dial in at the > prearranged time can still access tutorial material. Either way, it'd be > worth trying the live version just to see how many people actually join. The > live tutorial could then be captured via screencast and edited into a > finished archive... > > --Lorrie > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: > > > > > This could also be a package of tutorials lined up with the different > > > steps. Make a screencast of each step and put them online on a nice page > > > that could be emailed to new users. A starters pack, so to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Austin Che > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > It kind of defeats the purpose if it's pre-recorded but there > > > > could be some standard script, e.g. everyone go edit their user > > > > pages now. Everyone go look at the recent changes, hit diff to > > > > see > > > > what people changed, etc. > > > > > > > > > Would this virtual tour be something pre-recorded or is this > > > > something more > > > > > like e-learning with interactivity? > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Austin Che > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> This is a random suggestion from something I just saw another > > > > site > > > > >> have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led by > > > > >> Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members from > > > > that > > > > >> week are sent an email letting them know about it. They log in > > > > >> online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual > > > > tour of > > > > >> OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users just as > > > > >> they get on also. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Ricardo Vidal > > > rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net > > > Skype: icky_bu > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/f2c18b26/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Mon Feb 25 21:16:01 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:16:01 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251004v6dc5e515v1dd29e85f46a4919@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802251816y32b92bbld7d53097f1b59442@mail.gmail.com> Use the form, Reid... Use the form... Don't be afraid to make a copy of the html form and show us exactly what you mean or change that one. Wiki history is a great way to compare and contrast revisions. I think having a good trail of concrete pages and forms when we have access to a wiki where we can do this helps me in implementing. If something is so broken that I can't make it work, I'll let you know why. Email is a good way to push us to something but it's cool to see something like the form Ilya sent. Not only does it give all of us a clear pircute, I can literally use it as the form to code to. Just my thoughts. Thanks for the comments! Bill Flanagan On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:56 PM, Reid Williams wrote: > I agree. I'd also add empty space between a form textbox and the following > text. > > -reid > > > > > > On Feb 25, 2008, at 10:04 AM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: > > Ilya, > > I prefer Ilya's option. As long as the field for emails doesn't break if > an address is not introduced properly among others that are. > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Ilya Sytchev wrote: > > > I think we need a simpler form. Here's a mock up of what I have in mind > > (fields borrowed from pandora.com): > > > > http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Ilya/Sandbox > > > > > > Jason Kelly wrote: > > >> F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one person? > > We can > > >> do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > > > > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > > > > > I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you want > > > to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need to put > > > in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. > > > > > > cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. > > > > > > thanks, > > > jason > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che > > wrote: > > >> > 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I > > think this > > >> > may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few > > questions. > > >> > > > >> > A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? > > >> > > >> Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. > > >> > > >> > > >> > B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? > > >> > > >> Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. > > >> > > >> > > >> > C. Where should we put the button or label to send the invitation? > > >> > > >> Maybe on the how to join page. > > >> > > >> > > >> > D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the > > person who > > >> > submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? > > >> > > >> That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique > > cookie > > >> or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be > > easier > > >> to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has the > > >> inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to > > >> generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the registration > > >> form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the lab, > > etc.) > > >> > > >> > > >> > E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an > > additional > > >> > comment? > > >> > > >> Can't think of why not. > > >> > > >> > > >> > F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one > > person? We can > > >> > do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. > > >> > > >> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. > > >> > > >> > > >> > G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person > > sending the > > >> > invitation? > > >> > > >> Sure why not. > > >> > > >> > > >> > Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and > > would make > > >> > for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also > > gives us > > >> > quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the > > inviation is > > >> > acted upon. > > >> > > >> Might as well record it if possible. > > >> > > >> I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' numbers > > >> indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at > > >> motivating people to do things in communities. We can do > > something > > >> like the weighted sum of: > > >> - number of invited people > > >> - total number of edits > > >> - number of articles created > > >> - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list > > >> - etc. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > >> discuss at openwetware.org > > >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080225/6d31725d/attachment.htm From rshetty at MIT.EDU Mon Feb 25 23:16:55 2008 From: rshetty at MIT.EDU (Reshma Shetty) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 23:16:55 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802251759k7986a09g2ab7488b04a43040@mail.gmail.com> References: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> <87r6f03iqu.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251209n6afbe376i473e8ebd4035f226@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802251523q52f803d6t5bc1964dd0337a29@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802251527r1f484c80k783b99a5905aa6a8@mail.gmail.com> <26428aaa0802251759k7986a09g2ab7488b04a43040@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6e9f40380802252016s2488e548u3eeded06c426fd32@mail.gmail.com> http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Getting_started was originally intended as a tutorial for new users. I think it can be improved but it might be a good place to start. Also, I don't think we should go to html welcome messages. I find them a bit obnoxious. Thanks, Reshma On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Bill F wrote: > I like Ricardo's idea. We can link the tutorials to their User page when > they log in or provide a link in the message itself to o directly to the > tutorials. We can even go to HTML welcome messages if we want to provide for > adding an intro photo or link. > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Lorrie LeJeune > wrote: > > Maybe we ultimately have both? That way people who can't dial in at the > prearranged time can still access tutorial material. Either way, it'd be > worth trying the live version just to see how many people actually join. The > live tutorial could then be captured via screencast and edited into a > finished archive... > > > > > > --Lorrie > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: > > > > > > > This could also be a package of tutorials lined up with the different > steps. Make a screencast of each step and put them online on a nice page > that could be emailed to new users. A starters pack, so to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Austin Che > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kind of defeats the purpose if it's pre-recorded but there > > > > > could be some standard script, e.g. everyone go edit their user > > > > > pages now. Everyone go look at the recent changes, hit diff to > see > > > > > what people changed, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would this virtual tour be something pre-recorded or is this > something more > > > > > > like e-learning with interactivity? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Austin Che > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> This is a random suggestion from something I just saw another > site > > > > > >> have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led by > > > > > >> Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members from > that > > > > > >> week are sent an email letting them know about it. They log in > > > > > >> online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual > tour of > > > > > >> OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users just as > > > > > >> they get on also. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Ricardo Vidal > > > > rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net > > > > Skype: icky_bu > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > From Torsten.Waldminghaus at rr-research.no Tue Feb 26 05:55:00 2008 From: Torsten.Waldminghaus at rr-research.no (Torsten Waldminghaus) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:55:00 +0100 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Bioinformatics Message-ID: Dear OWWs, I'm starting to come to know the OWW world and was surprised to find that there are many nice bioinformatics protocols from wikiomics. It took me a wile to discover them since they are not included in the list at the protocol overview page. Is there a reason why that is or could one add the links to the in silico list? Is there an easier way to include all the wikiomics stuff than doing it one by one? Best, Torsten Waldminghaus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080226/a2126b93/attachment.htm From austin at csail.mit.edu Tue Feb 26 11:34:00 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:34:00 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business Message-ID: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> On slashdot: http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free?currentPage=all http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/26/0335227 I think the 'penny gap' is particularly interesting. There's a huge difference in market and psychology between charging nothing and any amount, even one penny. There's also an interesting grouping of 'free' business models. It seems like OWW will need to pick one of them to sustain itself. Here's how I applied them to OWW: Freemium: main wiki is free, we charge for private wikis or premium services Advertising: ads on the wiki, paid listings Cross-subsidies: We use a free wiki to sell something else (OWW t-shirts? OWW kits?) Zero marginal cost: the cost of hosting/running the site reach zero so we don't need to get any money. Labor exchange: Make money off the labor generated by OWW users. For example, sell the rights to publish OWW protocols to books. Gift economy: rely on altruism. -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From await at genetics.med.harvard.edu Tue Feb 26 12:12:27 2008 From: await at genetics.med.harvard.edu (Alexander Wait Zaranek) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:12:27 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <8b89c0c0802260912r57568395y351398bc1f5c82b5@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Austin Che wrote: > Freemium: main wiki is free, we charge for private wikis or > premium services > We want fewer private wikis in the world anyway, so, why not charge for them? Maybe the hard part is that selling the premium services--such as private wikis--might create some kind of conflict of interest. For example, Jimbo focused on Wikipedia for a long time before he moved on to the for-profit project (Wikia). And while not everyone is happy that "wikia" even exists, at this point, Wikipedia seems to be standing on its own. Is the goal to become "grant free" for OWW? To supplement the grants to allow for expansion? Is there a timeline? > Gift economy: rely on altruism. > this works for wikipedia and could/should work for OWW to some extent. Does OWW have a "donate" button lurking somewhere? Have we ever had a funding drive? Are OWW operating budgets etc audited or available? As a comparison Wikipedia financials are at: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Finance_report I find looking at these helpful for thinking about what OWW could be. Sasha From macowell at gmail.com Tue Feb 26 12:43:20 2008 From: macowell at gmail.com (Mackenzie Cowell) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:43:20 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] weekly live training In-Reply-To: <6e9f40380802252016s2488e548u3eeded06c426fd32@mail.gmail.com> References: <87y7983jpm.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251146q43eb7527y9db888b17f81a53c@mail.gmail.com> <87r6f03iqu.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251209n6afbe376i473e8ebd4035f226@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802251523q52f803d6t5bc1964dd0337a29@mail.gmail.com> <2cbee05b0802251527r1f484c80k783b99a5905aa6a8@mail.gmail.com> <26428aaa0802251759k7986a09g2ab7488b04a43040@mail.gmail.com> <6e9f40380802252016s2488e548u3eeded06c426fd32@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <54746a3f0802260943n4d7002c9i3c91f97762b02746@mail.gmail.com> I really like the idea of some kind of live introduction to OWW, either via a centralized periodic group info session led by lorrie, or by a more ad-hoc connection between the new user and an available OWW evangelists like us on this list. Maybe Austin's recent experimentation with the jabber server could be useful here. Last year during iGEM I arranged for skype video conferences with some of the new teams that seemed to be struggling and it dramatically lowered the threshold those teams had for asking questions far after the fact. I think having a live conversation gave a real face and voice to what was otherwise a barren email address, and also demonstrated that we cared about them and wanted to talk to them. I don't think there is a more powerful way to engage new users in the openwetware community. Mac On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Reshma Shetty wrote: > http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Getting_started > > was originally intended as a tutorial for new users. I think it can > be improved but it might be a good place to start. > > Also, I don't think we should go to html welcome messages. I find > them a bit obnoxious. > > Thanks, > > Reshma > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Bill F wrote: > > I like Ricardo's idea. We can link the tutorials to their User page when > > they log in or provide a link in the message itself to o directly to the > > tutorials. We can even go to HTML welcome messages if we want to provide > for > > adding an intro photo or link. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Lorrie LeJeune > > wrote: > > > Maybe we ultimately have both? That way people who can't dial in at > the > > prearranged time can still access tutorial material. Either way, it'd be > > worth trying the live version just to see how many people actually join. > The > > live tutorial could then be captured via screencast and edited into a > > finished archive... > > > > > > > > > --Lorrie > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Ricardo Vidal > wrote: > > > > > > > > > This could also be a package of tutorials lined up with the > different > > steps. Make a screencast of each step and put them online on a nice page > > that could be emailed to new users. A starters pack, so to say. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Austin Che > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It kind of defeats the purpose if it's pre-recorded but there > > > > > > could be some standard script, e.g. everyone go edit their > user > > > > > > pages now. Everyone go look at the recent changes, hit diff > to > > see > > > > > > what people changed, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would this virtual tour be something pre-recorded or is this > > something more > > > > > > > like e-learning with interactivity? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Austin Che < > austin at csail.mit.edu> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> This is a random suggestion from something I just saw > another > > site > > > > > > >> have. We have weekly training calls ~1 hour, probably led > by > > > > > > >> Lorrie or someone else in the community. All new members > from > > that > > > > > > >> week are sent an email letting them know about it. They > log in > > > > > > >> online or via teleconference and get led through a virtual > > tour of > > > > > > >> OWW. It would be an opportunity to chat with new users > just as > > > > > > >> they get on also. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Austin Che > (617)253-5899 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Ricardo Vidal > > > > > rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net > > > > > Skype: icky_bu > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > > discuss at openwetware.org > > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > > discuss at openwetware.org > > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -- Mac Cowell iGEM Coordinator igem.org 231.313.9062 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080226/5a27f23b/attachment.htm From enobarber at gmail.com Tue Feb 26 14:55:34 2008 From: enobarber at gmail.com (Reid Williams) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:55:34 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <8b89c0c0802260912r57568395y351398bc1f5c82b5@mail.gmail.com> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <8b89c0c0802260912r57568395y351398bc1f5c82b5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01F15D73-9979-47D7-8390-B82C8C090B2B@gmail.com> On Feb 26, 2008, at 9:12 AM, Alexander Wait Zaranek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Austin Che > wrote: >> Freemium: main wiki is free, we charge for private wikis or >> premium services >> > We want fewer private wikis in the world anyway, so, why not charge > for them? I always thought private wikis were a good loss leader for groups or labs that are wary of opening completely. > For example, Jimbo focused on Wikipedia for a long time > before he moved on to the for-profit project (Wikia). And while not > everyone is happy that "wikia" even exists, at this point, Wikipedia > seems to be standing on its own. > > Is the goal to become "grant free" for OWW? To supplement the grants > to allow for expansion? Is there a timeline? > >> Gift economy: rely on altruism. >> > this works for wikipedia and could/should work for OWW to some extent. > Does OWW have a "donate" button lurking somewhere? Have we ever had > a funding drive? Are OWW operating budgets etc audited or available? > As a comparison Wikipedia financials are at: > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Finance_report I find looking > at these helpful for thinking about what OWW could be. > > Sasha > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From enobarber at gmail.com Tue Feb 26 14:55:34 2008 From: enobarber at gmail.com (Reid Williams) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:55:34 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <8b89c0c0802260912r57568395y351398bc1f5c82b5@mail.gmail.com> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <8b89c0c0802260912r57568395y351398bc1f5c82b5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01F15D73-9979-47D7-8390-B82C8C090B2B@gmail.com> On Feb 26, 2008, at 9:12 AM, Alexander Wait Zaranek wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Austin Che > wrote: >> Freemium: main wiki is free, we charge for private wikis or >> premium services >> > We want fewer private wikis in the world anyway, so, why not charge > for them? I always thought private wikis were a good loss leader for groups or labs that are wary of opening completely. > For example, Jimbo focused on Wikipedia for a long time > before he moved on to the for-profit project (Wikia). And while not > everyone is happy that "wikia" even exists, at this point, Wikipedia > seems to be standing on its own. > > Is the goal to become "grant free" for OWW? To supplement the grants > to allow for expansion? Is there a timeline? > >> Gift economy: rely on altruism. >> > this works for wikipedia and could/should work for OWW to some extent. > Does OWW have a "donate" button lurking somewhere? Have we ever had > a funding drive? Are OWW operating budgets etc audited or available? > As a comparison Wikipedia financials are at: > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Finance_report I find looking > at these helpful for thinking about what OWW could be. > > Sasha > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From ilyas at MIT.EDU Tue Feb 26 15:27:13 2008 From: ilyas at MIT.EDU (Ilya Sytchev) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:27:13 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Bioinformatics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47C47621.2020603@mit.edu> I think you'd have to do it one by one. Ilya Torsten Waldminghaus wrote: > Dear OWWs, > > > > I'm starting to come to know the OWW world and was surprised to find > that there are many nice bioinformatics protocols from wikiomics. It > took me a wile to discover them since they are not included in the list > at the protocol overview page. Is there a reason why that is or could > one add the links to the in silico list? Is there an easier way to > include all the wikiomics stuff than doing it one by one? > > > > Best, > > Torsten Waldminghaus > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Feb 26 18:03:53 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:03:53 -0600 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <200802261703.53571.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 26 February 2008, Austin Che wrote: > ? ? There's also an interesting grouping of 'free' business models. > It seems like OWW will need to pick one of them to sustain > ? ? itself. Here's how I applied them to OWW: Let people copy the information and it will spread be alive considering its very high relevance. Encourage people to set up servers and backups of the wiki all over the place, with central aggregation nodes to make sure all of the updates are propagated. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From enobarber at gmail.com Tue Feb 26 18:29:39 2008 From: enobarber at gmail.com (Reid Williams) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:29:39 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Invite someone to join OpenWetWare... In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802251816y32b92bbld7d53097f1b59442@mail.gmail.com> References: <26428aaa0802241139w205c9840ud7b99af3db31cc52@mail.gmail.com> <87k5ku6qaq.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <7c085c480802241246h5a418d9ex914bba44add55877@mail.gmail.com> <47C302A5.2080606@mit.edu> <213fc43b0802251004v6dc5e515v1dd29e85f46a4919@mail.gmail.com> <26428aaa0802251816y32b92bbld7d53097f1b59442@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: done: http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/User:Reidw/Tmp On Feb 25, 2008, at 6:16 PM, Bill F wrote: > Use the form, Reid... Use the form... > > Don't be afraid to make a copy of the html form and show us exactly > what you > mean or change that one. Wiki history is a great way to compare and > contrast > revisions. > > I think having a good trail of concrete pages and forms when we > have access > to a wiki where we can do this helps me in implementing. If > something is so > broken that I can't make it work, I'll let you know why. > > Email is a good way to push us to something but it's cool to see > something > like the form Ilya sent. Not only does it give all of us a clear > pircute, I > can literally use it as the form to code to. > > Just my thoughts. > > Thanks for the comments! > > Bill Flanagan > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:56 PM, Reid Williams > wrote: > >> I agree. I'd also add empty space between a form textbox and the >> following >> text. >> >> -reid >> >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 25, 2008, at 10:04 AM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: >> >> Ilya, >> >> I prefer Ilya's option. As long as the field for emails doesn't >> break if >> an address is not introduced properly among others that are. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Ilya Sytchev wrote: >> >>> I think we need a simpler form. Here's a mock up of what I have >>> in mind >>> (fields borrowed from pandora.com): >>> >>> http://openwetware.org/wiki/User:Ilya/Sandbox >>> >>> >>> Jason Kelly wrote: >>>>> F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one >>>>> person? >>> We can >>>>> do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. >>>> >>>>> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. >>>> >>>> I think it would be nice to list multiple addresses in case you >>>> want >>>> to invite a few of your friends. Also, not sure why they need >>>> to put >>>> in the name of the invitee, email address should be enough. >>>> >>>> cool, this is a great addition for outreach / recruitment. >>>> >>>> thanks, >>>> jason >>>> >>>> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Austin Che >>> wrote: >>>>>> 3. The person who invited the user currently isn't being sent. I >>> think this >>>>>> may be important; I've added support for it but I have a few >>> questions. >>>>>> >>>>>> A. Should people need to be logged in to send the message? >>>>> >>>>> Definitely. Avoid being a spam relay. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> B. Should the name of the member be included in the message? >>>>> >>>>> Yes. That's much more likely to get a response. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> C. Where should we put the button or label to send the >>>>>> invitation? >>>>> >>>>> Maybe on the how to join page. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> D. Should we record the invite and then send a message to the >>> person who >>>>>> submitted the invitation when the invitee registers? >>>>> >>>>> That might be difficult to tell unless you have some unique >>> cookie >>>>> or something for them to accept the invitation. It would be >>> easier >>>>> to do the reverse and have a field on registration that has >>>>> the >>>>> inviter's user name. Even better, it should be possible to >>>>> generate a link that when clicked, pre-fills out the >>>>> registration >>>>> form with various items (such as inviter's name, maybe the >>>>> lab, >>> etc.) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> E. Should we allow the person submitting the invitation to add an >>> additional >>>>>> comment? >>>>> >>>>> Can't think of why not. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> F. Should we allow for sending invitations to more than one >>> person? We can >>>>>> do a whole lab if we want; I'm current;y taking in just one name. >>>>> >>>>> They probably can just send it to a mailing list. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> G. Should we offer to cc: the message sent out to the person >>> sending the >>>>>> invitation? >>>>> >>>>> Sure why not. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Recording the invitation isn't a lot more effort to implement and >>> would make >>>>>> for a way to let users know we appreciate their efforts. It also >>> gives us >>>>>> quantitative info on who's being invited and how often the >>> inviation is >>>>>> acted upon. >>>>> >>>>> Might as well record it if possible. >>>>> >>>>> I think we need to implement a karma system. 'Worthless' >>>>> numbers >>>>> indicating the value of a member is surprisingly good at >>>>> motivating people to do things in communities. We can do >>> something >>>>> like the weighted sum of: >>>>> - number of invited people >>>>> - total number of edits >>>>> - number of articles created >>>>> - number of emails sent to discuss mailing list >>>>> - etc. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Austin Che (617) >>>>> 253-5899 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >>>>> discuss at openwetware.org >>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >>>> discuss at openwetware.org >>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >>> discuss at openwetware.org >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >> discuss at openwetware.org >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List >> discuss at openwetware.org >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss >> >> From skosuri at gmail.com Tue Feb 26 19:45:06 2008 From: skosuri at gmail.com (Sriram Kosuri) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:45:06 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Bioinformatics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2b0cb7a10802261645v67b69ca8qb149ca1bed0d758c@mail.gmail.com> Hi Torsten, Thanks for sending this message in. The wikiomics pages were imported when the site seemed to be enveloped by spam. Some of the users decided to move the spam free pages over to openwetware. We did them recently in bulk, and that is why they were never put on the main page. There have been a few discussions for how to collate protocols automatically (mainly because most of the protocols on OpenWetWare aren't listed on the protocols page). The solutions that people have been discussing have ranged from labelling with categories, with pages that are dynamically generated to display pages with those categories... to just encouraging users to be more diligent. This by the way, would be a great discussion to bring up at the next steering committee meeting. You can join in at the next one, and I would email Lorrie Lejeune (OWW's new managing director), to find out more. In the meantime, it would be good to spotlight all the pages that are on the wikiomics page on OWW. Thanks for chiming in, and hope to hear from you at the next meeting. Sri On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 5:55 AM, Torsten Waldminghaus < Torsten.Waldminghaus at rr-research.no> wrote: > Dear OWWs, > > > > I'm starting to come to know the OWW world and was surprised to find that > there are many nice bioinformatics protocols from wikiomics. It took me a > wile to discover them since they are not included in the list at the > protocol overview page. Is there a reason why that is or could one add the > links to the in silico list? Is there an easier way to include all the > wikiomics stuff than doing it one by one? > > > > Best, > > Torsten Waldminghaus > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080226/349ba4da/attachment.htm From await at genetics.med.harvard.edu Tue Feb 26 20:15:31 2008 From: await at genetics.med.harvard.edu (Alexander Wait Zaranek) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:15:31 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <200802261703.53571.kanzure@gmail.com> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <200802261703.53571.kanzure@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8b89c0c0802261715v7c54fa70l12b7419e960f9303@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > Encourage people to set up servers and backups > of the wiki all over the place, with central aggregation nodes to make > sure all of the updates are propagated. > actually, i wanted to offer to do this last steering committee meeting. Anyone else doing it already? We could also run a mysql slave so edits were up to the minute and not just a dump. Setup a dedicated virtual machine on one of our clusters? I'd love to see it happen... Sasha From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Feb 26 21:36:54 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:36:54 -0600 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <8b89c0c0802261715v7c54fa70l12b7419e960f9303@mail.gmail.com> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <200802261703.53571.kanzure@gmail.com> <8b89c0c0802261715v7c54fa70l12b7419e960f9303@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802262036.54433.kanzure@gmail.com> On Tuesday 26 February 2008, "Alexander Wait Zaranek" wrote: > actually, i wanted to offer to do this last steering committee > meeting. ?Anyone else doing it already? ? We could also run a mysql > slave so edits were up to the minute and not just a dump. ?Setup a > dedicated virtual machine on one of our clusters? ? I'd love to see > it happen... That'd be great. And if not, I already have my backup copy of OWW. - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From rvidal at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 11:18:49 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:18:49 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Timeout problem Message-ID: <213fc43b0802270818v3e6dc29drbd6a71db72710d48@mail.gmail.com> Julius, I think I know what your timeout problem may be. It has to do with your login timing out and not allowing you to post your info or even going back to save the textarea field after long edits, right? I had that problem and it's a big turn off. But recently I've found how to overcome this and stay logged in all the time. Go to your preferences and set a new password (can be the same one) and then select "Remember my login on this computer" That's it. Now you should be logged on permanently until you want to log off. This tick box in the preferences seems to work whereas the other one that exists underneath the login form, doesn't. Or at least not for me (and others that I've seen mentioning this problem). -- Ricardo Vidal rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net Skype: icky_bu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/a61c49ef/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 13:53:08 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:53:08 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Timeout problem In-Reply-To: <213fc43b0802270818v3e6dc29drbd6a71db72710d48@mail.gmail.com> References: <213fc43b0802270818v3e6dc29drbd6a71db72710d48@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802271053qdcdc647h498af86f720c978c@mail.gmail.com> Ricardo, Thanks for the comments. I'd like to find a way to make this info and other related info accessible to others: this is a frequent question. We spoke of the relevance of blogs and the poor searchability within OWW. I suspect I mean we've spoken* around the search issue* rather than directly of it. But this is a great example of a small comment that will someday save someone hours of data re-entry time or a decision to stop using OpenWetWare altogether. I have another related comment re: getting data into the system that, if I just say it here, will be useful to a few folks but because it's in an email message, it will be lost to the rest of the world. How do people think we should proceed? Julius and Mac have been working on "how-to" articles. Lorrie and I are working to come out with a consistent and useful way of providing help for all parts of out Lab Notebooks. Is better Help a solution? What do you think? Any ideas? In general I wish we had a way to take these kind of email messages and turn them directly into categorized and searchable wiki content. But I'm not sure email is an answer in itself. Thanks. B. On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: > Julius, I think I know what your timeout problem may be. It has to do with > your login timing out and not allowing you to post your info or even going > back to save the textarea field after long edits, right? > > I had that problem and it's a big turn off. But recently I've found how to > overcome this and stay logged in all the time. > Go to your preferences and set a new password (can be the same one) and > then select "Remember my login on this computer" > > That's it. Now you should be logged on permanently until you want to log > off. > > This tick box in the preferences seems to work whereas the other one that > exists underneath the login form, doesn't. Or at least not for me (and > others that I've seen mentioning this problem). > > -- > Ricardo Vidal > rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net > Skype: icky_bu > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/d1150c2a/attachment.htm From bcanton at MIT.EDU Wed Feb 27 14:03:14 2008 From: bcanton at MIT.EDU (Barry Canton) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:03:14 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Timeout problem In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802271053qdcdc647h498af86f720c978c@mail.gmail.com> References: <213fc43b0802270818v3e6dc29drbd6a71db72710d48@mail.gmail.com> <26428aaa0802271053qdcdc647h498af86f720c978c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <52c0d2160802271103u6061ed7an48d46405794f128a@mail.gmail.com> > > In general I wish we had a way to take these kind of email messages and > turn them directly into categorized and searchable wiki content. But I'm not > sure email is an answer in itself. > How technically hard would it be to archive all emails sent to the discuss list somewhere appropriate on the wiki? Barry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/d4c79fc1/attachment.htm From julius.lucks at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 13:57:37 2008 From: julius.lucks at gmail.com (julius.lucks) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:57:37 -0800 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Timeout problem In-Reply-To: <26428aaa0802271053qdcdc647h498af86f720c978c@mail.gmail.com> References: <213fc43b0802270818v3e6dc29drbd6a71db72710d48@mail.gmail.com> <26428aaa0802271053qdcdc647h498af86f720c978c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: One way to do it would be to create a Hlep entry for anything like this that comes up: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Help:HOWTO Other ways of dealing with it that seem to work is to have a community forum where threads are suggested and replied to. I find these useful at first, but then unweildy when they grow very large. Maybe a combination of both where someone is in charge of migrating the forum answers to polished help pages is the best way to go. Cheers, J ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- Please Reply to My Permanent Address: julius at younglucks.com http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------- On Feb 27, 2008, at 10:53 AM, Bill F wrote: > Ricardo, > > Thanks for the comments. I'd like to find a way to make this info > and other related info accessible to others: this is a frequent > question. > > We spoke of the relevance of blogs and the poor searchability > within OWW. I suspect I mean we've spoken around the search issue > rather than directly of it. But this is a great example of a small > comment that will someday save someone hours of data re-entry time > or a decision to stop using OpenWetWare altogether. I have another > related comment re: getting data into the system that, if I just > say it here, will be useful to a few folks but because it's in an > email message, it will be lost to the rest of the world. > > How do people think we should proceed? Julius and Mac have been > working on "how-to" articles. Lorrie and I are working to come out > with a consistent and useful way of providing help for all parts of > out Lab Notebooks. Is better Help a solution? What do you think? > > Any ideas? > > In general I wish we had a way to take these kind of email messages > and turn them directly into categorized and searchable wiki > content. But I'm not sure email is an answer in itself. > > Thanks. > > B. > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Ricardo Vidal > wrote: > Julius, I think I know what your timeout problem may be. It has to > do with your login timing out and not allowing you to post your > info or even going back to save the textarea field after long > edits, right? > > I had that problem and it's a big turn off. But recently I've found > how to overcome this and stay logged in all the time. > Go to your preferences and set a new password (can be the same one) > and then select "Remember my login on this computer" > > That's it. Now you should be logged on permanently until you want > to log off. > > This tick box in the preferences seems to work whereas the other > one that exists underneath the login form, doesn't. Or at least not > for me (and others that I've seen mentioning this problem). > > -- > Ricardo Vidal > rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net > Skype: icky_bu > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/57ed334b/attachment.htm From rvidal at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 15:26:54 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:26:54 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Timeout problem In-Reply-To: <52c0d2160802271103u6061ed7an48d46405794f128a@mail.gmail.com> References: <213fc43b0802270818v3e6dc29drbd6a71db72710d48@mail.gmail.com> <26428aaa0802271053qdcdc647h498af86f720c978c@mail.gmail.com> <52c0d2160802271103u6061ed7an48d46405794f128a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <213fc43b0802271226y505add6eu2bb7842e56208256@mail.gmail.com> Hey, Just a quick question (excuse my ignorance) aren't discussion lists usually also accessible via web in the form of a threaded discussion list? For example, Google Groups is a discussion list but most activity is done via email. All emails and discussion can later be consulted there. So, in a way, email doesn't fall into an abyss. Also, if certain questions are asked frequently, then I would assume someone on the committee or someone could go ahead and write up a nice and detailed answer and add it on a FAQ page. I wouldn't mind starting if necessary. ~Ricardo On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Barry Canton wrote: > In general I wish we had a way to take these kind of email messages and > > turn them directly into categorized and searchable wiki content. But I'm not > > sure email is an answer in itself. > > > > How technically hard would it be to archive all emails sent to the discuss > list somewhere appropriate on the wiki? > > Barry > -- Ricardo Vidal rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net Skype: icky_bu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/fb51c2eb/attachment.htm From lorrielejeune at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 11:14:16 2008 From: lorrielejeune at gmail.com (Lorrie LeJeune) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:14:16 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Community project brainstorming meeting tomorrow Message-ID: <6ac0a26a0802270814g160ab921gd96456c154ae9065@mail.gmail.com> Hi Folks, If possible, I'd still like to have a community projects brainstorming meeting tomorrow at noon. If enough people are able to call in, I'll set up a teleconference number or a skype call, otherwise we can do it over chat. If nobody is available, we can reschedule for next week. The master list of ideas is at http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Community/Project_brainstorming#Information_contribution. Since we could spend days talking about everything on this list let's keep the meeting manageable by focusing on a few key topics. My short list might include: Recruiting new members ? ways of inviting new users to join (Bill has been working on an email invitation) ? real-world meetup sessions Activating existing community members ? building and updating help pages ? constructing tutorials ? rewarding users who step up and do things The goal of the meeting will be to generate a task list that people can get started on. I'll post an agenda on the community projects brainstorming page. Please feel free to update it. --Lorrie -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/edb29e50/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 17:02:15 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:02:15 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Timeout problem In-Reply-To: <52c0d2160802271103u6061ed7an48d46405794f128a@mail.gmail.com> References: <213fc43b0802270818v3e6dc29drbd6a71db72710d48@mail.gmail.com> <26428aaa0802271053qdcdc647h498af86f720c978c@mail.gmail.com> <52c0d2160802271103u6061ed7an48d46405794f128a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802271402v7c9e8b45j56700da8c5edd71c@mail.gmail.com> We can at least have the mailinglist server know how to automatically cc: OpenWetWare for all items associated with a list. Simple and searchable. Then we can use a DPL call to organize them. That might work. I am reticent to just dump Help pages in an unco nstrained manner given where we are right now. Uinsing the "SiteSearch" tag, we can do something clever maybe. What if the title of the doc was the question? Help:FAQ/How do I keep OWW from logging me off automatically? If we were smarter we could even set it up so that there were different types of questions like this: Help:FAQ/Access/How do I keep OWW from logging me off automatically? This would allow each level to have its own "search from here" page that would give a god answer or maybe give the user the chance to create a new page and a request to answer it. We could then turn the pages into a mailing list. You can sign up at any level to answer questions by subscribing to the page. All the answers are then collected. We can also generate an RSS feed of all the new FAQ questions and FAQ answers. Hmm.... not much code to write. and it may generate good info. Mailing list... meet wiki! On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Barry Canton wrote: > In general I wish we had a way to take these kind of email messages and > > turn them directly into categorized and searchable wiki content. But I'm not > > sure email is an answer in itself. > > > > How technically hard would it be to archive all emails sent to the discuss > list somewhere appropriate on the wiki? > > Barry > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/960c1a78/attachment.htm From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 17:11:13 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:11:13 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Eating our own dogfood. Message-ID: <26428aaa0802271411l4edff6ddu9cfc144b7959c92@mail.gmail.com> The best way to fix software for a developer is to use it. I'm now opening up Notebook: projects for each of my major tasks. I'll send out a list when I am done. Anyone who wants to play can do so. For now, I have the following: * http://openwetware.org/wiki/Notebook:CMS * Working with Mac on an extension to create MediaWiki content in a more rational way for HTML-centric designers. *http://openwetware.org/wiki/Notebook:Lab Notebook Help* Working with Lorrie on OWW Help Pages *http://openwetware.org/wiki/Notebook:FAQ Management* Frequently asked question workflow management I may move to use "OWW Projects" as a URL prefix for these but not at the moment. Thanks. B. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/a2005886/attachment.htm From austin at csail.mit.edu Wed Feb 27 18:48:27 2008 From: austin at csail.mit.edu (Austin Che) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:48:27 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] chat Message-ID: <87pruit0z8.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> I've put up some documentation for the oww jabber chat. Hopefully it should make it easier for people to get connected and we can get away from the phpfreechat. I'm currently personally recommending Spark as the client for all platforms. If other people have instructions for setting up clients, please edit: http://openwetware.org/wiki/Help:Chat -- Austin Che (617)253-5899 From bill.altmail at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 17:03:34 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:03:34 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Community project brainstorming meeting tomorrow In-Reply-To: <6ac0a26a0802270814g160ab921gd96456c154ae9065@mail.gmail.com> References: <6ac0a26a0802270814g160ab921gd96456c154ae9065@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802271403o17ca94abt61d0ffab93e62c71@mail.gmail.com> Bear in mind that Skype calls from your desktop seem to have a finite number of entries. I think it may be 9. Based upon a call yesterday, it's cool but a tiny bit of an acquired skill. B. On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Lorrie LeJeune wrote: > Hi Folks, > If possible, I'd still like to have a community projects brainstorming > meeting tomorrow at noon. If enough people are able to call in, I'll set up > a teleconference number or a skype call, otherwise we can do it over chat. > If nobody is available, we can reschedule for next week. > > The master list of ideas is at > http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Community/Project_brainstorming#Information_contribution. > > Since we could spend days talking about everything on this list let's keep > the meeting manageable by focusing on a few key topics. My short list might > include: > > Recruiting new members > ? ways of inviting new users to join (Bill has been working on an email > invitation) > ? real-world meetup sessions > > Activating existing community members > ? building and updating help pages > ? constructing tutorials > ? rewarding users who step up and do things > > The goal of the meeting will be to generate a task list that people can > get started on. I'll post an agenda on the community projects brainstorming > page. Please feel free to update it. > > --Lorrie > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/c4608f3b/attachment.htm From rvidal at gmail.com Wed Feb 27 20:57:31 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:57:31 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Community project brainstorming meeting tomorrow In-Reply-To: <6ac0a26a0802270814g160ab921gd96456c154ae9065@mail.gmail.com> References: <6ac0a26a0802270814g160ab921gd96456c154ae9065@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <213fc43b0802271757s9b9b5dv66876d93d2b2aa2@mail.gmail.com> Count me in :) On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Lorrie LeJeune wrote: > Hi Folks, > If possible, I'd still like to have a community projects brainstorming > meeting tomorrow at noon. If enough people are able to call in, I'll set up > a teleconference number or a skype call, otherwise we can do it over chat. > If nobody is available, we can reschedule for next week. > > The master list of ideas is at > http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenWetWare:Community/Project_brainstorming#Information_contribution. > > Since we could spend days talking about everything on this list let's keep > the meeting manageable by focusing on a few key topics. My short list might > include: > > Recruiting new members > ? ways of inviting new users to join (Bill has been working on an email > invitation) > ? real-world meetup sessions > > Activating existing community members > ? building and updating help pages > ? constructing tutorials > ? rewarding users who step up and do things > > The goal of the meeting will be to generate a task list that people can > get started on. I'll post an agenda on the community projects brainstorming > page. Please feel free to update it. > > --Lorrie > > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -- Ricardo Vidal rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net Skype: icky_bu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080227/762c5a59/attachment.htm From Torsten.Waldminghaus at rr-research.no Thu Feb 28 04:51:06 2008 From: Torsten.Waldminghaus at rr-research.no (Torsten Waldminghaus) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:51:06 +0100 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Bioinformatics In-Reply-To: <2b0cb7a10802261645v67b69ca8qb149ca1bed0d758c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Sri, I made some changes on the in silico part of the protocol page but I don't really know if it is improving. It's hard to say what should be regarded a protocol when it comes to the computer stuff. I'll also leave some suggestions on the corresponding talk page about the organization of the protocol page. Would that be the right place to discuss such thinks or should one better use this e-mail list? Thanks for the invitation to the steering committee meeting but I would want to come to know OWW a bit better to not ask stupid questions that have been discussed 10 years ago. Anyway, I like OWW a lot and try to find some time to edit a bit here and there. Torsten ________________________________ From: Sriram Kosuri [mailto:skosuri at gmail.com] Sent: 27. februar 2008 01:45 To: Torsten Waldminghaus; Lorrie LeJeune Cc: discuss at openwetware.org Subject: Re: [OWW-Discuss] Bioinformatics Hi Torsten, Thanks for sending this message in. The wikiomics pages were imported when the site seemed to be enveloped by spam. Some of the users decided to move the spam free pages over to openwetware. We did them recently in bulk, and that is why they were never put on the main page. There have been a few discussions for how to collate protocols automatically (mainly because most of the protocols on OpenWetWare aren't listed on the protocols page). The solutions that people have been discussing have ranged from labelling with categories, with pages that are dynamically generated to display pages with those categories... to just encouraging users to be more diligent. This by the way, would be a great discussion to bring up at the next steering committee meeting . You can join in at the next one, and I would email Lorrie Lejeune (OWW's new managing director), to find out more. In the meantime, it would be good to spotlight all the pages that are on the wikiomics page on OWW. Thanks for chiming in, and hope to hear from you at the next meeting. Sri On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 5:55 AM, Torsten Waldminghaus wrote: Dear OWWs, I'm starting to come to know the OWW world and was surprised to find that there are many nice bioinformatics protocols from wikiomics. It took me a wile to discover them since they are not included in the list at the protocol overview page. Is there a reason why that is or could one add the links to the in silico list? Is there an easier way to include all the wikiomics stuff than doing it one by one? Best, Torsten Waldminghaus _______________________________________________ OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List discuss at openwetware.org http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080228/16ebaf9c/attachment.htm From rvidal at gmail.com Thu Feb 28 13:25:47 2008 From: rvidal at gmail.com (Ricardo Vidal) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:25:47 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Fwd: Try the new Jotspot, Google Sites In-Reply-To: <20080228181831.22181.qmail@cg-out-0102.google.com> References: <20080228181831.22181.qmail@cg-out-0102.google.com> Message-ID: <213fc43b0802281025ra7b1ebfm2050014138e8502f@mail.gmail.com> The wiki-type site previously known as Jotspot was acquired by Google about a year ago and has now resurfaced. Looks like they vamped it up with all the google apps available. Looks pretty slick. Just thought it might be of interest. ~Rick ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: The Google Apps Team Date: 28 Feb 2008 18:18:31 -0000 Subject: Try the new Jotspot, Google Sites To: rvidal at gmail.com Greetings! We're contacting everyone who's expressed interest in learning of JotSpot registration re-openings on the JotSpot website. And today, we're excited to announce that JotSpot is working on Google infrastructure and has been re-launched as Google Sites. Google Sites is the latest offering from Google Apps, a suite of products designed to improve communication and collaboration amongst employees, students, and groups. Google Sites makes creating a team web site as easy as editing a document. You can quickly gather a variety of information in one place -- including videos, calendars, presentations, attachments, and gadgets -- and easily share it for viewing or editing with a small group, their entire organization, or the world. To get started with Google Sites, you'll first need to sign up for the Google Apps edition that's right for you (if you're not already a Google Apps user). Start the sign-up process at: http://sites.google.com Sincerely, The Google Apps Team Google Inc. 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View, CA 94043 -- Ricardo Vidal rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net Skype: icky_bu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080228/2d322228/attachment.htm From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Feb 28 14:45:28 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:45:28 -0600 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Will this implementation of the lac operon work? Message-ID: <200802281345.29114.kanzure@gmail.com> Hi all, I am designing a regulatory circuit and have been scratching my head over how to include enhancers, promoters and TATA boxes, etc. I have decided to make some progress by randomly guessing and getting feedback from the community. Here's my work: http://heybryan.org/genetic-circuits.html Basically I've taken the sequences of BBa_I14032, BBa_R0011, and BBa_B0034, attached the peptide I want to express, and have at it. It is my understanding, then, that given a lactose-full environment, my repressible circuit should express the peptide, and if I wanted to add a second circuit I could express a repressor that would bond to prevent RNA polymerase II from manufacturing my peptide as frequently. Correct? The documentation is rather sparse, so once I get my head around this I'll be sure to go back and fill in the gaps in the documents. Thanks, - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ From bill.altmail at gmail.com Thu Feb 28 14:21:24 2008 From: bill.altmail at gmail.com (Bill F) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:21:24 -0500 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Fwd: Try the new Jotspot, Google Sites In-Reply-To: <213fc43b0802281025ra7b1ebfm2050014138e8502f@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080228181831.22181.qmail@cg-out-0102.google.com> <213fc43b0802281025ra7b1ebfm2050014138e8502f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <26428aaa0802281121n3b8d0175ye33b526e6dd4fee9@mail.gmail.com> Thanks, Ricardo. What would be a good way to track this kind of info within OWW? Rather than just asking "What should we call the page?", think about how the info should best be stored and how it can be retrieved. There's literally no such thing as fielded info in the current wiki and the semantic mediawiki code still requires a good deal of support to fit free-text into a structured application-centric format. Thanks. B. On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Ricardo Vidal wrote: > The wiki-type site previously known as Jotspot was acquired by Google > about a year ago and has now resurfaced. Looks like they vamped it up with > all the google apps available. Looks pretty slick. > > Just thought it might be of interest. > > ~Rick > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: The Google Apps Team > Date: 28 Feb 2008 18:18:31 -0000 > Subject: Try the new Jotspot, Google Sites > To: rvidal at gmail.com > > > Greetings! > > We're contacting everyone who's expressed interest in learning of > JotSpot registration re-openings on the JotSpot website. And > today, we're excited to announce that JotSpot is working on Google > infrastructure and has been re-launched as Google Sites. > > Google Sites is the latest offering from Google Apps, a suite of > products designed to improve communication and collaboration > amongst employees, students, and groups. Google Sites makes > creating a team web site as easy as editing a document. You can > quickly gather a variety of information in one place -- including > videos, calendars, presentations, attachments, and gadgets -- and > easily share it for viewing or editing with a small group, their > entire organization, or the world. > > To get started with Google Sites, you'll first need to sign up for > the Google Apps edition that's right for you (if you're not > already a Google Apps user). Start the sign-up process at: > > http://sites.google.com > > Sincerely, > > The Google Apps Team > Google Inc. > 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway > Mountain View, CA 94043 > > > > -- > Ricardo Vidal > rvidal at gmail.com | http://my.biotechlife.net > Skype: icky_bu > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-discuss/attachments/20080228/483e16fa/attachment.htm From dan.bolser at gmail.com Fri Feb 29 13:04:14 2008 From: dan.bolser at gmail.com (Dan Bolser) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 19:04:14 +0100 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> Message-ID: <2c8757af0802291004h38221487vd215e280bf92d8ea@mail.gmail.com> On 26/02/2008, Austin Che wrote: > > On slashdot: > http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free?currentPage=all > http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/26/0335227 > That reminds me... openfree Genomics.org http://genomics.org/index.php/Main_Page "$0 Genomics" Project Launched on-line. Please sign! The first contributions of 'complete' human genome-typing data sets have already been contributed to this openfree community. I discovered my friend shouldn't drink too much coffee! (He has rs762551 type "AC"... see below). Metabolism and heart attack Journal JAMA Study Size Replications None Contrary Studies None Ethnicities European Marker rs762551 Caffeine is primarily metabolized by the enzyme cytochrome P450 1A2 (CYP1A2) in the liver. The SNP rs762551 causes a change in this enzyme that may significantly affect the rate of caffeine metabolism. In this study, people with the slower version of the CYP1A2 enzyme had increased risk of a non-fatal heart attack when they increased their coffee intake. The study found that slow metabolizers who drank more than two to three cups of coffee a day had a significant increase in their risk of non-fatal heart attack compared with fast metabolizers, who may have even reduced their risk when they drank coffee. Who Genotype What It Means Greg Mendel (Dad) AA Fast caffeine metabolizer. Lilly Mendel (Mom) AC Slow caffeine metabolizer: drinking coffee increased subjects' heart attack risk. CC Slow caffeine metabolizer: drinking coffee increased subjects' heart attack risk. Citations Cornelis MC et al. (2006). "Coffee, CYP1A2 genotype, and risk of myocardial infarction." JAMA 295(10):1135-41. > I think the 'penny gap' is particularly interesting. There's a > huge difference in market and psychology between charging nothing > and any amount, even one penny. > > There's also an interesting grouping of 'free' business models. It > seems like OWW will need to pick one of them to sustain > itself. Here's how I applied them to OWW: > > Freemium: main wiki is free, we charge for private wikis or > premium services > > Advertising: ads on the wiki, paid listings > > Cross-subsidies: We use a free wiki to sell something else (OWW > t-shirts? OWW kits?) > > Zero marginal cost: the cost of hosting/running the site reach > zero so we don't need to get any money. > > Labor exchange: Make money off the labor generated by OWW > users. For example, sell the rights to publish OWW protocols to > books. > > Gift economy: rely on altruism. > > > -- > Austin Che (617)253-5899 > _______________________________________________ > OpenWetWare Discussion Mailing List > discuss at openwetware.org > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-discuss > -- hello From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Feb 29 19:56:10 2008 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:56:10 -0600 Subject: [OWW-Discuss] Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business In-Reply-To: <2c8757af0802291004h38221487vd215e280bf92d8ea@mail.gmail.com> References: <87ve4by8w7.fsf@nitsua.mit.edu> <2c8757af0802291004h38221487vd215e280bf92d8ea@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802291856.11051.kanzure@gmail.com> On Friday 29 February 2008, Dan Bolser wrote: > That reminds me... > > openfree Genomics.org > > http://genomics.org/index.php/Main_Page This is not a true $0 genomics project. I'd like to point out that people can still make relevant contributions to the project by providing increasingly better schematics for DNA sequencing technologies, I have a few notes up on my site. http://biohack.sf.net/wiki/index.php/$0_genomics_project - Bryan ________________________________________ Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/