FAQs

[NT]

It crosses my small but functional brain that we can do FAQs the easy way. Just start a thread heading called Lime FAQ or whatever, plus a second thread called discussing the Lime FAQ, and off we go. Things can be added as and when as well.

Then the main FAQ, which could be a sticky thread, just has links to each faq thread. Its much easier than the more formal approach.

Waddya think?


NT

 

[GK]

Something along those lines. Every now and again we get a real gem of an authoritative post which really ought to get saved somewhere, but gets lost in the rest of the not so useful stuff (except to the op, of course).

Trouble with 'formal' FAQs is that they represent the world according to the author.

Except that Phil 't' Joiner seemed to be in fear of PPUK readers all becoming bench joiners he could have authored a sash pocket FAQ...couldn't he...? Someone must have asked about 'em.

 

[Nemesis]

Not so easy - look at lime for example. It may appear a simple thing on which all agree, but in fact there is a great deal of controversy and so it's really not such a simple thing to be authoritative.

While some see trad lime putty as the answer, others think bagged hydrate is fine. Some think hydraulic is the answer for all purposes, others profoundly disagree and consider non-hydraulic is what should be used apart from in special circumstances.

And who is to say who is correct?

I don't think anyone asked about sash pockets. It was a piece of trolling, pure and simple, designed to denigrate a few key posters here. Pity it was so blatantly OTT!!!

 

[GK]

What I'm saying is a few key posts which might well be at odds with each other on the same subject get saved. Then the reader is aware that there are differing views but at least you've got knowledgeable opinions.

Who moderates it though, that's a problem. And it'll only result in a load of "which FAQ is correct in this situation" posts.

'Twas you that mentioned sash pockets again...you said it was sad that the picture link no longer works.

 

[Nemesis]

I know. Naughty of me. Tongue in cheek very firmly. P the J has been mentioned in the not too distant past though... However, see what it did? You retrieved the pics from the inner sanctum of your hard drive, and now there they are for all eternity together on the site. Pity Phil will apparently be going to the grave crowing about how he knows how to cut them and others don't!

I have to say on a personal level I'm unlikely to ever wish to cut a sash pocket, but I'm sure that there are others who have gnashed their teeth in angst ever since those pics were posted.

I'm more interested in what sort of initiation rite has to be gone through in order that the secret is passed from master to journeyman...

 

[skier-hughes]

I'm sure my Father in law cut his teeth making sash windows the proper way, I'll ask him when he gets back from his holidays.

As for a FAQ, it could be a selection of useful posts.

On other forums I use they have several sections, rather than the two that are here.

If the powers that be were to set up an archive of useful posts forum and gave someone the moderation powers that are required to move posts then when someone posed a question about which lime to use for pointing and it develped into a very useful discussion on the pros and cons of putty v hydration, said thread could be moved to the useful posts archive.

If at a later date a new thread developed which made use of different or more recent information then it could quite easily be added to or replace the other thread on lime.

This would build up a FAQ on real life and relevant items and would be contributed to by all, instead of say Person X writing all they know about lime pointing.

Then all you need is for someone to PM or email the moderator in charge to say - hey thread abc on the use of roof insulation looks really useful, can we archive it, or even they could post a seperate thread adn others could say, yep that's well worth keeping handy and offer the chance for others to add to that thread if they felt it needed mroe info before being archived.

Archived topics could be locked, so that no further posts can be added, or left open.

Everything you read on the interent has to be taken with a pinch of salt anyway, it's up to the reader to read as much as they can and determine which parts are suitable for them...... you only have to look at Google and China..........

 

[Nemesis]

This forum has discussed this issue before, and considered in the main that splitting things up into separate sections was a bad idea. It was discussed when the forum changed. over - MattJ raised it again. David posted what I think was a consensus response.

It may suit those who keep bits of string in tins marked 'string' in a shed at the bottom of the garden, but the fact that the old forum was different was what attracted many to it in the first place.

Sad that's it's gone.

In fact here is part of the thread...
MattJ

Joined: 13 May 2006
Posts: 16

Posted: Sat 13th May, 2006 7:35 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Having lobbied Period Property to replace the old forum by a proper bulletin board, I welcome the change heartily. Now all they have to do is setup some more defined forums on listing, surveys, lime, windows.

Matt

Back to top


Penners



Joined: 10 May 2006
Posts: 588
Location: Suffolk
Posted: Sun 14th May, 2006 4:45 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matt

I'm not sure I agree with you about splitting up the forum into very specific topics.

One of the common factors about people who use this forum is that they all have a wide-ranging interest in all aspects of period properties and their conservation. It's interesting and informative to be able to see the variety of problems that we all encounter, without having to dodge about from one forum to another all the time.

Back to top


Moo



Joined: 11 May 2006
Posts: 217
Location: Norwich, Norfolk
Posted: Sun 14th May, 2006 5:32 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- and the interesting way in which a thread can metamorphose into something quite different, before drifting back to the main topic.

Back to top


Penners



Joined: 10 May 2006
Posts: 588
Location: Suffolk
Posted: Sun 14th May, 2006 5:51 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah - morta... mata... meter...

change.

Back to top


biffvernon



Joined: 09 May 2006
Posts: 499
Location: Lincolnshire
Posted: Sun 14th May, 2006 7:37 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm with Moo and Penners there. I use another forum that is split up but it's a very different set of subjects. Old buildings call for a holistic approach, not pigeonholing.

Back to top

 

[skier-hughes]

Evelyn,

Serious question, forget other thread.

Do you not save intersting pieces of information to certain places on your computer?

I do, I may copy and paste a thread from this forum and save it in a folder hierachy system, which for me makes finding information much easier.

I have
Berry Brook House (main folder - with sub folders)
Lime
Kitchen
Garden
etc

Then when I come to do some work, like now I have just been painting my new windows, I go to the paint folder to read the discussions on linseed oil paint, or I can quickly get to the holkham paint site etc.

I find this very easy to use, rather than open up the PP forum, type in Linseed oil paint to the search and then wade through the many posts which have mentioned it to try to find the one I found useful.

This is the way I work, I'm not forcing people to use it, but was giving my opinion on how a FAQ could evolve. I was only suggesting one new topic header.... I was in the camp for splitting, but there were more against than for and I haven't taken this matter any further.

I'm sure you must have a list of useful links to the likes of SAVE, SPAB etc saved in a folder somewhere, you don't look them up each time you use them, or type them in by hand do you?

 

[NT]

Not so easy - look at lime for example. It may appear a simple thing on which all agree, but in fact there is a great deal of controversy and so it's really not such a simple thing to be authoritative.

While some see trad lime putty as the answer, others think bagged hydrate is fine. Some think hydraulic is the answer for all purposes, others profoundly disagree and consider non-hydraulic is what should be used apart from in special circumstances.

And who is to say who is correct?

This is one of the plusses of using threads imho. Not only is the attempt at an authoritive piece seen, but so too are any discussions and other views that pop up. And there is no reason to limit a subject faq to just one thread, let each view be seen.

The other plus is its so much easier than other systems involving rewrites, moderators, committees, votes and so on.

We currently have very little in the way of faq material, but would soon build up a fair amount by doing nothing more than listing links to threads. If otoh we went for a complex formal work intesive method, a year down the line we'll have very little.


NT

 

[Nemesis]

Graham - I have in the past printed off a handful of posts - very, very few - Peter Maitland Hood on paint... but I used to talk to him about other things such as lime. I took it for granted he would be there forever sadly.

As for the rest - two of us here have been involved with conservation and the repair of old buildings for decades. I don't keep much else as frankly little of it is news to me. If I want particular info I have friends I ask.

Links to SAVE? Sure several times a day to the office. It's called e-mail and telephone. My folders are full of stuff about cases I'm involved with, in one way or another, research and things... the things that are important to me.

As for the rest - I honestly don't care. I haven't got time, interest or inclination. If anyone wants to do FAQ's or any any other method of information retrieval - up to you.

 

[Lynn]

I think the FAQ that points to useful threads is fine. A person could just do a search, but many (most) new people don't bother and that is a shame because it puts a lot of repetition in the forum and the people who answer these questions probably get bored.

I think it seems a lot of work went into the articles in the "Information" section. They seem unusually high quality for a forum of this size. I think there are some basics missing and maybe on these basic topics the article could be "here are some relevant threads." 'nuf said.