Good thing we have all clarified by example, eh.
On May 21, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
Sorry, everybody: When I made my comment about WordPress being
nerdy, I was confused.
N
From: David Collins [mailto:collida...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2011 7:31 PM
To: disc...@sfcomplex.org
Subject: Re: [sfx: Discuss] Re: [FRIAM] blog recomendations?
It's worth noting that choice of platform can have more impact on
social behavior than we might first acknowledge.
Wordpress implies primarily a call-and-response narrative that
distinguished between content producers and content users. Readers
can contribute, but mostly in the form of response to narrative
framed by site editors.
Mediawiki in its basic format invites user-originated content, but
does not promote the classic workflow paradigms that have long
assured quality publication -- for example, there's no clean, out-of-
the-box provision for pre-publication drafts. As a CMS, it's
particularly robust, but it was developed to reflect an ideology of
openness now embedded in the software. The way the software
associates discussion pages with articles presumes content-
production discussions to be open. The software can be modded, but
out of the box offers no venue for closed or role-limited editorial
discussion.
Drupal is more readily configured for granular or even open access
to support user contributions to an expanding content base. Drupal
could probably be configured to serve as both traditional newsroom
workflow management system and a publication platform. But the
complexity of the system implies a culture defined by a separation
between developers and content contributors. It would take some
modular development to allow integration of diverse forms of user-
generated data other than text.
Hubzero provides some of all the above, while providing a platform
for sharing of high-level scientific models, and a bit of facebook-
style social networking. It too implies the availability of a
specialized community of developers. It's open source and free for
those who can figure it out, but a $50,000 pricetag for hosted
access suggests the level of complexity under the hood. It's
certainly not plug-and-play like Wordpress and its more complex by
an order of magnitude compared to what may be the leading open-
source social networking system Elgg.
Each approach has proven to be productive in many ways for various
purposes, but the fact remains that choice of content system informs
and reflects choices about how we communicate in groups.
--- David
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Owen Densmore <o...@backspaces.net>
wrote:
I totally agree. For someone not ever wanting their own hosting
site, the big three (wordpress.com, blogger, and google sites)
certainly make sense.
Tumblr was new to me and is getting some nice street cred:
http://www.orphicpixel.com/tumblr-vs-wordpress/
Because I *really* would require the ability to move my site from
one place to another (maybe no one else cares!), I'd look at:
http://codex.wordpress.org/Importing_Content
But all in all, the only reason *not* to use wordpress is that it
sometimes can require you're writing php for themes. But the newer
default theme is not the Huge But Ugly Button theme (Kubrick). The
plusses of wordpress are pretty overwhelming:
- Easy to import/export
- Easy to self host and convert to self hosting later
- Lots of folks can help you use it
- Gets steadily better every release
- Great support for plugins
- Great update support
-- Owen
On May 21, 2011, at 5:07 PM, David Collins wrote:
> Dreamweaver and plain old HMTL work great, but they require going
outside the CMS for such an ubiquitous feature as user comments
though cloud-sourced user comments can bridge that gap.
>
> Wordpress has features not found in Dreamweaver including tags,
feeds, indexing (with on-page indexes) and a super-accessible admin
interface, and much much more in plugins. A big site running on
Dreamweaver can become daunting to modify if one hasn't anticipated
a good approach for configuring site-wide theme elements.
>
> On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Owen Densmore
<o...@backspaces.net> wrote:
> Nice summary.
>
> BTW: Odd no one suggested simply using Dreamweaver or similar
tool. Just plain old fashioned web pages and images up in the cloud
work just fine for most folks needing a simple site.
>
> And I think both Mac and Windows have built-in HTML/Site editors,
and also hosting of some sort.
>
> -- Owen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Santa Fe
Complex "discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to disc...@sfcomplex.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
discuss+unsubscr...@sfcomplex.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/sfcomplex.org/group/discuss
--
phone 505-629-2426
Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/dacfbwall
davidacollins.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Santa Fe
Complex "discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to disc...@sfcomplex.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
discuss+unsubscr...@sfcomplex.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/sfcomplex.org/group/discuss
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
