Now I'm annoyed...

* The website has grown significantly since it started off. Although I have disagreed with Bart on one or two little things lately, he has dedicated alot of his own personal time to the creation of this environment and should be warmly thanked for that.

Something I am thankful to Bart for too, but he has hinted at refusing help when it was offered in the past (I am looking for the post(s) in question) because the help would have been in something akin to proprietary software, which Bart disagrees to, because he does not want to be a Mikrosopht (MS) drone, as he puts it.

Seanie.

Something I am thankful to Bart for too, but he has hinted at refusing help when it was offered in the past (I am looking for the post(s) in question) because the help would have been in something akin to proprietary software, which Bart disagrees to, because he does not want to be a Mikrosopht (MS) drone, as he puts it.

I know about Bart's stance on using open software, avoiding commercial software, and insisting on open document formats.

While this stance is noble one, I'm not convinced it is very practical for this site and its members.

This is an astronomy website, not a site to promote the benefits of *nix and open source. So trying to convince (non-techie) site members of the benefits is a tough proposition. This is something that has also caused differences of opinion in the past.

To be honest, I'm quite sick of the slating that Microsoft regularly gets on here. This site is about astronomy, not someone's platform to slam MS. I've worked for MS for three years, and in all that time I've tried to keep a neutral stance to avoid upsetting anyone, but to be honest I've just had enough. This is not the place for it. There are plenty anti-MS sites out there where people can freely express their opinions.

The reality is that 99% of the members use MS software on a MS operating system. They are using commercial products like Paintshop Pro, Photoshop, and Dreamweaver. They are creating proprietary document formats like XLS, DOC and PSD. They aren't using *nix, Open Office, and Gimp. Simple as that.

Finally, I just can't see the reasons for the technical complexities behind the website. I really don't. This is a simple astronomy website with a forum and files section. There's no need to turn it into a showcase for open source and hand-coded PHP. This increases the development time and limits the amount of help other people can offer. Putting restrictions on things like file formats and development tools limits that even further.

What is potentially more damaging to the sites future development, someone generating a page or two using Dreamweaver, or one person walking around with the entire PHP/CSS code in their head? (Which also results in all the maintenance and support tasks depending on one person)

Keep it simple. Most of the suggestions that people are making can be achieved using off-the-shelf (free) PHP code with some customisation. There's no need to turn this into a big development project. There's already code out there for bulletin board (and mods), gallery, files upload and events calendar.

More oil on the fire perhaps, sorry for the loooooong post but these are a number of points I feel I now need to mention.

I'm not surprised that Bart played the resigning card, this is a decision that is up to him, Please dont get me wrong, I would be very sorry to see Bart go, I would not be here typing this if it wasn't for him.

I'm also a moderator (in the observing equipment forum) and would only close a thread if someone was genuinely and deliberately offended, I would never close a thread if it was going in circles, this is not a valid reason IMHO to close a thread, boring as it might get. If people want to go around in cirles, thats up to them. Just before it was closed, I did ask myself that if I was the moderator, would I stop this thread, I decided that I wouldn't, a few hours later it was closed.

It might also be a good time to replace absentee moderators, some of these people are never on this site, or atleast never make posts.

Making posts on a closed thread is politically a very bad move and really should be refrained from.

Pro or anti MS?, I used unix and xp pro extensively, and I couldnt care less what people used, I use to despise MS before xp pro came out, I was one of those people that used 98 and it drove me completely around the bend (BSOD lockups etc...), but now with XP I'm a happy camper.

I dont build websites so I havent a clue what your all talking about wrt tables/css etc so I dont care how the site is coded, as long as it works and people are included, if you lads disagree, do try and be a bit more tactful to each other, if yee had, the discussion would not have got so hot headed.

I do feel that all file formats should be uploadable here, as long as file size isnt too bit.
Frankly Bart, using this astronomy site to enforce your ethics regarding proprietary formats is wrong, no where does it say in the IFAS constitution that the IFAS is against proprietary software formats (.doc .xl etc), the coding/implentation or running of the site is not compromised by uploading these formats. The next step in that path would be to prevent the uploading of any images that were generated using proprietary software such as imageplus or photoshop. I understand when you say that "some" people mightn't be able to open word files, frankly, that is their problem, the vast majority of us can. If someone was to post a .psd (photoshop format) file, then they would only be preventing many people from seeing their image which is self defeating, but if they wanted someone else to play around with their layers or maybe want someone else to add one in, then there are definite advantages to it, that specialised format would be put up for a specific reason. I understand that you need to make certain policy decisions regarding the site, decisions regarding site build etc are in your realm, but what people post up is not (presuming no libel/offensive material is put up).

I think people would be reasonable when uploading files to the site. I suspect that if we held a poll here for and against proprietary formats, you would be out voted.

Please, please, do not take this as a personal attack on you Bart, this is just how I feel about it.

A good range of opinions have been expressed in the above, were well worth saying and certainly provide food for thought.

From here on though, little will be gained from further comment here. Discussions are going on it the background and hopefully some issues will be clarified in the next day or so. As a personal favour, I would ask that further opinions aren't posted here until a suitable line can be drawn on the discussion. This may take a few days to resolve though so please be patient for a little while.

...back to astronomy folks!

Jeebus, how did I miss this thread!

OK, I'm just going to make a few quick points here, I'm not going to go into big mad posts ATM.

Firstly, I want to clarify why I "played the resignation card" as it has been put. It was not because I dissagree with Dave P or anything like that. It was because I was told by a user that I, as the webmaster did not have the right to make technical decisions. What I said was, that if that was the case then I would have to resign becaues it would be impossible for me to work under those conditions. I asked the committee for clarification, and was informed that I did have the right to make technical decisions so as far as I was concerned that was the end of that. I am a firm believer in only holding positions that I can actually do something with. If I find I am in a position that I feel I cannot contribute anything with I step aside. IMO it is the best thing for me to do and also the best thing for the organisation. Dead weight is a bad thing!

Secondly, on the whole open standard thing. Some people seem to have gotten the wrong end of the stick on this one. TBH I can kinda see why that might have happened because I am not exactly secretive about my disslike for Billy G and his company. That's just a personal opinion based on years of negative experiences and an abhorance of some of their business practices. The open standards thing is not an anti-MS thing and to equate the two is not correct or fair.

The actual policy is that the end product should be presented in a form that is open, NOT that you have to make it with open-source software! Afterall, who am I to tell you what software you should be using! You can use any software you like as long as the end product you are contributing is contributed in an open format. There are lots of small, free tools to do that for you in the event that your software of choice does not have such an option built in.

Why is the policy there? Simple, because IFAS do not have the right to tell people they need to use any particular opperating system or to buy any aprticular software to access our site. It is about GIVING the users the freedom not to use a particualr OS or a particualr piece of software!

I hope that at least clarifies those two particular missconceptions I spotted in this thread.

A good range of opinions have been expressed in the above, were well worth saying and certainly provide food for thought.

From here on though, little will be gained from further comment here. Discussions are going on it the background and hopefully some issues will be clarified in the next day or so. As a personal favour, I would ask that further opinions aren't posted here until a suitable line can be drawn on the discussion. This may take a few days to resolve though so please be patient for a little while.

...back to astronomy folks!

Sorry, only saw this after I replied :oops: :oops: