Orders & Medals Society of America › Forums › About the OMSA Forum › Welcome to the OMSA Forum › Acitvity on the forum
- This topic has 7,313 voices and 14 replies.
March 21, 2012 at 11:50 pm #12311ed_haynesParticipant
Sad to see
1- The level of activity on the forum — it is pretty dead now — has anyone else noticed? Not even the "golden boys" visit or post. Did anyone expect they would?
2- The NON-transfer of all the lost or banned posts — there was some good material there, now gone forever, destroyed, clear-cut through bumbling ignorance or incompetence.
This has happened since the coup and purge took place. OMSA members, please remember. Beyond simple "incompetence"!
And read quick, before this gets deleted too. And probably me as well.
Damn, I wish I didn’t still care about the society. Being "disappeared" won’t be so bad if anyone sees this.March 22, 2012 at 8:37 am #15678
The forum, like any other, is what people make of it.
I visit daily, contribute when I have something to say… although mostly my contributions are more appropriate to the Images Database than to the forum itself. This may change as I am gathering more and more information to go with the pictures, generally in excess of what can be contained in the text block associated with the image.
If there are specific topics that have been lost, please let me know – I have a knack for ferreting stuff out (or as my daughter likes to say, a black belt in Google-fu!).March 22, 2012 at 1:11 pm #15679jb floydModerator
The content of the old site was archived because compatibility problems precluded transferring the old posts. It was not lost, it was not destroyed, but simply moved. It did not involve the Illuminati or even the Mayan Calendar, but a simple change in technology.
A civil request that a topic be mined from the archive will be answered in due course. Address such requests to John Allgood or Doc Reilly.March 22, 2012 at 2:24 pm #15680
The old website has not been erased. If you want content from there, please let me know and I will get it moved here. We did not want to move over everything wholesale for a variety of reasons. There is no conspiracy, real or imagined.
I would argue that the old forum had similar problems with activity. The best way to get more people to contribute is to encourage posts and a civil attitude.
A number of people visit every day but don’t always post. Some of the activity on this forum, as well as other forums, isn’t readily obviousMarch 26, 2012 at 5:50 pm #15695friviligParticipant
There are other aspects to Ed’s point, which have to do with the relative ease of using the system, and which may fall on familiar ears. For non-IT persons, the new system is simply not nearly as user friendly. Sorry, but that is just the way I perceive it. Admittedly, user proficiency is what one gets used to, but the new system does require extra cognition and deductive reasoning to find things. Another aspect in my observation is the issue of having to constantly manipulate and reduce any photos to meet the new system pixil size requirements. I know space is an issue, however, frankly, if the photo is is 100×150 when the system only allows 90×135, why bother with the extra work? At least that is my reason for not posting with the frequency that I once did.
Mon Dieu, I am actually on Ed’s side of the fence.
Attachments:You must be logged in to view attached files.March 31, 2012 at 1:04 am #15709
The photo limitation you mention is for the size of avatars. I have since bumped up these dimensions to 100×150. If that is not the case, I don’t fully understand the problem you are having. Feel free to contact me directly if there is still a problem.
JohnApril 11, 2012 at 7:41 am #15744john f.Participant
The photo limitation you mention is for the size of avatars.
It’s not the avatar size which is the problem it is the posting of pics to the forum like Bill (frivilig) stated. I too have limited my posting due to having to go back and resize my images in order for them to meet a specific dimension of 700 pixels wide x 700 pixels high. This sizing issue doesn’t seem to apply in the posting of images in the data-base.
Here is the error msg I got when I attempted to post an image:
"The image must be at least 0 pixels wide, 0 pixels high and at most 700 pixels wide and 700 pixels high. The submitted image is 1212 pixels wide and 650 pixels high."
Other forums have seemed to have been able to crack the code on automatically resizing pics to met dimension requirements (if any) when posting images, is it possible for OMSA to follow suit?April 12, 2012 at 7:17 pm #15746
The image database and the forum are really two separate entities. Both use different software and have different user interfaces.
I can’t immediately answer the question about automatically changing the format of the photos. I will try and delve into the issue. At the worst, I can expand the limitations. I will ask those more "techie" than I.
JohnApril 13, 2012 at 10:46 am #15748
I shall have a delve and let you know – I am quite familiar with PHPBB which is the core engine underpinning the discussion forum here…April 13, 2012 at 3:23 pm #15749
Feel free to pm or email me with what you find.
JohnApril 16, 2012 at 11:12 am #15754
I’ve found one which I think will do what you want – I’ll PM a link to a description and download.November 3, 2013 at 3:37 pm #16880j. mccullochMember
So, what exactly were the problems?
I rarely log in here, especially as some of my Database images ( with information) were replaced by lesser images (with no information) or removed and in the case of Ethiopian material, replaced by incorrect information that matches stuff a British dealer says, but is inaccurate (e.g. Wrong/made up/incorrect).
Also, how many pictures of iron crosses do we really need? Navigating the images in some sections has become a real problem, notably where historical information was not added with an image.
Personally, as a dues paying member for 2 decades as well as someone who has contributed money to OMSA, I resented deeply the NY medals database being removed so as to require people to buy the printed versions. I do not think that was morally correct, nor a worthwhile use of our tax exempt status.
But what else happened?
Who runs this site now?November 6, 2013 at 10:31 pm #16886
Sorry for the delay in replying. Part of the problem with the old website was that the software was out of date and vulnerable to hacking attacks. We created the new website in an attempt to solve some of those problems. By no means has this eliminated software hackers and, sadly, I have to spend some time keeping out the gremlins. As a result, we shut off the ability to comment on the image database after a huge attack earlier this year. I have yet to find a good replacement to the image database software. Any suggestions from a knowledgable person would be appreciated.
If there is incorrect data in the image database, please let me know. I will do my best to try and update the information appropriately. Bear in mind that any supporting information helps prove the accuracy of our information.
If you are interested in "who runs this site now", please look at the link at the bottom of the page saying "The team". That will give you the functional managers of the site.
JohnNovember 7, 2013 at 1:50 am #16889jb floydModerator
John has done an outstanding job just keeping the site running. Most of you don’t see the spam attacks and that’s due to diligent work by the IT team.
Jeff brings up a good point on the image data base and that’s something that the board is addressing. We’re considering a couple of ideas that will take a fair amount of effort, but will drive us forward whichever track we take.
One option is a wiki-style data base, with formatted templates that include space for images and text. This will alow for increased data to accompany each image. A second option is one in which we essentially build a framework to be be filled in by the membership. This will cut down duplication of images and make it clear what gaps exist in the data base. In either case, a strong indexing system will make it easier to find an image. As with any volunteer organization, we need the active leadership of a knowledgeable collector out front and we need input from a wide range of collectors. A bit of study by moderators should address the problems Jeff alludes to.
As John mentioned above, let us know if you see something that’s inaccurate or missing, and we’ll address it.
To the point of taking the New York data base down. That was a board decision that makes fiscal sense. We published the hard-copy and owe it to the membership to make some return on that expenditure. The board approved the re-activation of the data base at the last mid-year board meeting, but that process is taking longer than expected (my comment about volunteer organizations applies here as well.)
In the meantime, write some posts, show some images, pose some questions. We can’t expect one or two members to shoulder the entire burden.November 7, 2013 at 10:00 am #16890
The wiki-style has some advantages, in that it allows for more information to be added to the image – at present there’s only room for very basic notes when you add an image to the database. It would also allow the addition of things like the laws and statutes establishing ODM, award documents and variations in insignia to be displayed and discussed.
I have been looking into setting up such a thing, as I’m now finding myself with more information than the format of my site allows, but not yet done anything at least in part due to cost issues. Happy to help you establish one here and I surely have plenty to contribute once it is set up!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.