Forum Moderators: open
It's also an idea with some pitfalls. In fact, that's why WebmasterWorld didn't launch such a forum, even though Brett did work on some code for it.
So, this thread is to discuss whatever pitfalls people see, and their possible solutions. A couple ground rules:
1. This is about brainstorming the idea itself. It is not a place to submit a site for review on various platforms.2. This is not a recruitment thread. No sticky mail solicitations, please - keep the discussion about problem solving and completely out in the open where we all can benefit.
With that said, a good way to kick off the conversation might be to quote Brett's comments from the original thread:
"When we first started WebmasterWorld the topic of a screen shot exchange forum came up repeatidly. I thought it was an excellent idea. Code was written to manage it all and is still here on my disk.
About a month before I was ready to put it online last year, Nimda hit. Many forums and sites that allowed people to upload files (such as avatar files) were severely hit by hackers using the upload feature to inject scripts/code on to disk.
The hardest thing for a hacker is to get code on to a target sites disk. Once there, standard exploits can be run to execute the code and more-than-likely, open the system wide up.
It became pretty obvious that allowing people to upload data - any data - is a major security risk regardless of the precautions. Even those utils that upload straight to a database such as SQL is a risk (they can use db exploits to get the data back out).
The other problem, is that of whisper promotion, and other "optimization" tricks. The head CTO for Yahoo says, "..any where you give people the opportunity to contribute content or rate items, you will have someone that exploits the system." Even though we are one of the friendlest communities on the web, we've already seen much of that here with post counts, and "over optimized" posts (including: hidden text and hidden links within posts).
So, based on those two things, we've passed on the screen shot exchange."
My biggest concern is when the functionality breaks cross-platform or cross-browser. And a screenshot won't catch that. But inviting people to check site functionality has an even greater potential for various exploits than a screenshot exchange.
So I don't see a way to ever have such a "community" to be more than a small, elite and very well vetted private club.
[edited by: tedster at 4:32 pm (utc) on July 23, 2002]
It seems that it would have to have a completely different set of very stringent rules and multiple mods. I have visions of the mods in this forum being totally overworked snipping and deleting.
I don't really understand exactly how it could be accomplished with out url drops and blatant exploitation. Would there be an invisible (to the open forum) place to submit a url to and then based on the validity of the request allow it to be let into the open forum? Sounds like a search engine or directory in the making. ;) Or do you just allow people to throw their url out there for checking and snip like crazy? I am interested in the logistics of it but it still seems like an invitation to chaos.
>I have visions of the mods in this forum being totally overworked snipping and deleting.
The above pretty much sums up my first thoughts on it, except I'll add that it would most likely collapse into a "Please review my site" forum as well.
In concept, review forums seem simple enough, but they are a black hole for moderators' time --which is a scarce commodity.
Possibly give only Mods of that forum the ability to upload the pictures, such as you pick 3 or so mods one on each different OS. As long as its strictly inforced that there is to be NO Reviews the requests will stop. When URL drops happen right now anyways its normally a new user who does this. Once they are told its not allowed they stop, at least from what I see. I dont see alot of the same people doing it over and over.
However, one possible (but perhaps a little weak) workaround might be for members to upload screenshots up to their own webspace and only submit a URL for the screenshot to the new community.
Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with doing this for other members because it would be a reciprocal relationship and it totally eliminates the problem of upload exploits.
Tedster:
..I don't see a way to ever have such a "community" to be more than a small, elite and very well vetted private club.
But perhaps this is the key. You would belong to a self-regulating mini-community, and the whole community would be made up of these mini-communities.
A single large community would be too hard to police, even if it was self-regulating.
However with a mini-community (say of 20-50 members), it would be simpler for members to get to know and monitor each other.
Aspects that would need monitoring would be making sure members were pulling their weight by providing screenshots when required and making sure that the work is reasonably balanced between members - and there would be systems in place to help with this.
Each mini-community would be organised to represent all/most browser/platform combinations. The organisation of this would be performed by the single larger community, or rather the system that allows the community to function.
I imagine there would have to be some sort of waiting list for members (try not to laugh!) who could only provide screenshots from the more popular browser/platform combinations, as the supply would way outstrip the demand for screenshots from these.
On the flipside, this would encourage wannabe members to supply less widespread browser/platform combinations that were in demand by the mini-communities, as they would not have to waste time on a waiting list.
Tedster:
...inviting people to check site functionality has an even greater potential for various exploits than a screenshot exchange.
YES! I like that! I think a community structure as outlined above may work equally well with a screenshot exchange as it would with a (I don't know what to call it) "site functionality checking community"?!
What about a "sister site" where just about anything goes...with a
single forum at Webmasterworld where a person could link from a post
in the "anything goes" forum at WebmasterWorld to the sister site thread?
For instance, a person could start a "Review my site" thread in the
"anything goes" forum at WebmasterWorld stating what he or she is concerned about
with a link to the thread at the sister site, where there could be
discussion, uploads, screen shots, etc -- whatever is deemed OK.
This way, all who desire, could mention their URLs and other stuff at
the sister site, while keeping WebmasterWorld "pure".
Surely there will be a lot of junk posted at the sister site, but some
things are just very difficult to discuss unless you can see what a
person is talking about. For instance, some folks might want to show
a before and after of a webpage along with the difference in results for
discussion. Surely stuff like that would be worthwhile. Folks would
simply know there was noise at the sister site to filter out, while benefiting from
the good stuff.
Moreover, after awhile, folks would learn whose links in the
anything goes forum were worth persuing -- and whose spam to pass on.
Just a thought.
Louis
[edited by: stlouislouis at 5:10 pm (utc) on July 23, 2002]
no offence intended but this would sort of circumvent the whole ethical and friendly environment that Brett and everyone else has worked so hard to attain and maintain which is why we all love it here.
I do believe that if it is to be done it needs to be a forum within WmW to up hold the standards here not a free for all sister site where all the ne'er do wells we came here to get away from feel at home.
no offence intended, just imho.
Just a thought I thought might provide a way for folks to post
what they were talking about for group discussion. Those here often
can figure out what someone is talking about much better than a newbie
like me where an example they could see would aid in understanding.
Take care,
Louis
you raise a valid option, tedster is talking about exactly that, brainstorming, collecting suggestions/options. Your opinion is as valid as mine. The usefullness of such a forum is apparent but the method with which to get around the spam element is difficult and the more ideas the better.
<added>maybe a list of platforms/browsers and people apply to be one of the checkers and they post screenshots. A more extensive and complicated mod system sort of. If you have a certain check needed they post it for that specific group and they are responsible for that check and the posting there of. Have a set number for each combination.
Typically, the first post anyone makes here is a question to a specific problem. At least that's how I got here. Google search on a mod_rewrite question. Got my question answered, read some more while I was here, and got hooked. I think that's pretty typical of the people who end up sticking around.
With the browser preview thing, I think you would get a lot of people who would join up, ask for screenshots, get their sites up and running and forget about the forum until they had another site ready. For high-volume pros, that might happen a lot, but for many of the visitors here, it would hardly be a daily activity like WMW is.
Also, I think the Linux and Mac people (and, if there are any out there, the IE4 people) would give a lot more than they got.
I don't want to rain on anybody's parade and be a pessimist. I just think that it would start out great, and six months down the road, most people would abandon.
Sorry for the negativity,
Tom
I'm just working on a post now that I'm hoping might provide fodder for others to think of how we might avoid these pitfalls. It'll be up shortly.
There is another saying we should all be familiar with: a picture is worth a thousand words. But is this always the case? The answer is a definate and resounding, no.
The value that is in these forums is the community and the community's ability to discuss ideas and experiences that range from the very common to the most obscure. I personally have found it much easier to assimilate and learn when difficult concepts are discussed at length, with various perspectives from numerous individuals.
The format of Webmaster World not only invites discussion, it enforces it by making all of us look at the larger perspective, deal with broad concepts and refer to authoritative resources. We discuss, we formulate ideas, we test and re-test: we share.
I've used screen shots to illustrate a problem, but afterward, I realized the potential downsides. I won't do it again. I will however, post code and code variations and invite discussion, interact with Webmaster World members and participate actively.
As much as the idea of a "browser/screen shot" exchange may sound like a good idea, I feel it would take away from the valued discussion rather than contribute. Pictures, do NOT always tell the truth. Dicussions can however, be very enlightening.
- my 2 cents
papabaer
I participate in a group that does thorough site reviews, both the people's own sites and their client sites. There are many issues covered other than just browser compatibiity.
One of the main things that comes up regarding browsers is tables not rendering properly on the site. That would not even show with a screenshot, much less result in a solution for the problem.
Another is text size - different browsers, different platforms, different resolutions. Not something that a screen shot would work for from the problems I've seen with it.
Another is color. What's in the screenshot might not accurately represent what's actually being seen on the site, and that's a variance that can only be described by viewing the actual site, a lot of which can depend on the differences in monitor settings.
I don't mean to be negative, because I believe there is a lot of educational value in working through selected site reviews in a controlled environment. I've done it when hosting chats and other boards and also attended functions where site reviews were done. But screenshots wouldn't hack it for really demonstrating the things that people can learn from the site review process. A screen shot is not a web site, it's highly limited in usefulness.
Also, without a tighly controlled environment, linking to anyplace with site reviews could easily turn into linking to a spam-pit that would be a search engine penalty disaster waiting to happen.
I believe there are potentially very useful solutions that would be workable for site reviews, but if it could be done with screenshots I haven't personally figured out how that would work.
Re: spam, link farms?
I agree totally!
Very frightening...
It would happen.
And again: pictures do not display the reason or combination of reasons for a particular situation. Discussion does accomplishes this.
We do not allow review my site posts. It is impossible to deduce which posts are honest requests and which are just promotional drops. Additionally, our users are 90% web professionals and look for answers to specific problems.
There have been people who asked, referring to their profile sites, but how do we deduce which ones are just trying to tactfully get around the TOS?
Yes, we might not have access to the various operating systems, but this is not an insurmountable situation. There are plenty of resources, including Webmaster World's own forums that already have answers or clues to most solutions. Site Search is a great tool! Posting questions, an even better one.
[edited by: papabaer at 7:17 pm (utc) on July 23, 2002]
So change the TOS for this specific forum. If someone uses it to promote their site, so what? It would only be in that forum, and only people willing to review sites would notice anyway.
So from now on I'm concentrating on just the idea of a screenshot exchange - no discussions, no reviews, just screenshots. For the occassion you just want a screenshot and don't need to argue with someone as to why you've taken a certain design decision on your web site.
I realise you can't get lots of useful information from a screenshot, but still there is some use a screenshot can provide and for some people its just interesting to see what their site looks like on a different machine. Think, NetMechanic who provide a paid-for service to do this, probably have some customers.
So although screenshots aren't the be-all and end-all, there is a demand for them.
With the intentions of aiding explanation and simplifying further discussion I've made-up some terms relating to a screenshot exchange community:
browser-ring:
A mini-community where each member contributes at least one browser/platform combination. A member will only get screenshots from members of their browser-ring. A member only belongs to one browser-ring. The whole community consists of many browser-rings. I envisage communication between different browser-rings would be minimal.
personal browser index:
Each member has a personal browser index. A personal browser index is just a list of the browser/platform combinations that a member is able to supply screenshots for. When a member joins, they are presented with a checklist of all browser/platform combos. The member checks off which combinations they have and this forms their personal browser index. The index is updateable.
:) Ideal browser-ring
A browser-ring where every browser/platform combination is represented. It is the aim of the community as a whole to make every browser-ring an ideal browser-ring.
HOW IT WORKS
Okay, so here's how I think the screenshot exchange community might begin to work:
1) You join. You complete your personal browser index. If there is a non-ideal browser-ring which requires any of the browser/platform combinations listed in your personal browser index, then you are made a member of that browser-ring. Otherwise, you're put on a waiting list until a browser-ring is formed that requires some or all of your personal browser index.
2) Once you're in a browser-ring you can request screenshots. To request screenshots for a single URL: On the community site, you fill in a form with the URL you want shots of, and check off the browser/platform combinations you want. Then you wait (I'm thinking maybe upto 48 hours would be needed and reasonable??).
3) In the meantime, for each browser/platform combination an e-mail is sent off to a member of your browser-ring who can provide the relevant screenshot. If they decide they cannot provide the screenshot (for lack of time, etc.) then they simply click on a URL in the e-mail and this is registered at the community site so an e-mail can be sent off to someone else in the browser-ring who can provide the browser/platform combination required.
4) Those browser-ring members who can provide screenshots do just that. They take the screenshot, post it on the web on their own webspace, and submit the URL for the image to the community site (hopefully within the 48 hours).
5) As URLs are added of screenshots, a page is made up for the original URL showing all of the screenshots submitted. Members of the browser-ring can view this page.
POTENTIAL PROBLEMS (AND SOME SOLUTIONS)
A person that never contributes and only takes
The browser-rings would be self-regulating so conscientious members should spot the bad apples in their browser-ring. However a way round this would be to create a new membership each time you wanted a set of screenshots. To discourage this sort of behaviour it could be mandatory to provide a minimum number of screenshots before you can request any.
Overworked Mac/Linux users
There's likely to be more requests per Mac/Linux user than per Windows user on average. Ways to avoid this:
:: Windows only users are not admitted to the community
:: The demographic of a browser-ring is weighted so there are more Mac/Linux users than Windows.
Too much hassle to upload screenshots to your own webspace
I expect people would rather fire off an e-mail with the screenshot attached, or upload to the community site - but because of the problem with upload controls being exploited, this may not be an option. If users found it too much hassle to upload screenshots then maybe they'd be open to using a community provided cgi script on their web space to make uploading fractionally easier?
Okay, enough typing for me. Too much typing and I begin to smell - its time for a bath - can't wait for the feedback (please let there be some feedback when I get back!)
Richard Lowe
Imagine it as a completely separate entity from WmW.
>>Personally, I believe this idea cannot be made to work well without spilling over negatively into the rest of webmasterworld.
That's why I personally don't care for any links to other forums. Knowing that the integrity of information is highly valued here, there's no telling what can follow with an open forum or similar venue.
>>I believe one of the things that makes webmasterworld work is the lack of site review requests, URLs and advertising.
I fully agree Richard. I also believe that, however well-intentioned, if someone wanted to use WebmasterWorld to promote another community, it would, in all propriety and following proper protocol, have to be cleared with Brett first to receive prior permission to do so.
I don't believe that any decisions are made without 100% concern for the welfare and benefit of the membership as a whole and with the needs of individuals being considered. If there is no site review forum here, it's got to be well though-out and with good reason.
I personally like site reviews; I think they can be very educational if properly done and are targeted to address specific elements and follow set protocols. But the element of control over the environment has to be there, and I can't see how that could possibly be done without overseeing the administration and management of the community.
[edited by: Marcia at 8:05 pm (utc) on July 23, 2002]
this is the beauty of everyone sharing the problem and maybe working with code examples to communally find a solution that can be applied to the situation. In doing so we all get a better understanding of the tools we work with.
>>a few well chosen browser checks takes good care of that
This is the point, we can never test in every possible combination that may be out there so we do the best we can and make educated decisions as to how we test hoping to cover the highest number of possibilities. I would much rather test myself and not leave it to other people. I need to actually see it and interact with and see how it behaves.
I admit the idea doesn't really appeal to me. It seems useful but the more I think about it I like it less and less and only see the possible malfunctions far outweighing it's limited value.
imho
But if a simple method could be found it wouldn't be such a bad option. The benefit would have to out-weigh the cost though.
How's this? ---
Put the link in the profile and the request in a dedicated forum.
Don't mix the requests in with the general posts; make it a deliberate destination.
Strictly voluntary.
The volunteer viewer comments through sticky mail.
Any screenshot exchange would be up to the poster and viewer and outside WebMasterWorld.
Many (most?) of the requests would be from Windows based developers for Mac/Linux views. But if response is voluntary the system would operate at the resultant capacity - as much as the responders could bear. For that matter I think Mac/Linux users would handle as many requests as they could. What Mac/Linux user wouldn't jump at any chance to directly affect Windows based development?
Global "help me check this site in browsers A-Z" requests would dilute this focus.
Just my $0.02.
