PDA

View Full Version : Too many websites



doc
26-08-2004, 11:49 AM
I am a keen player from Victoria but have a concern regarding all of Australia. Wouldn't it be better if all state associations could run their websites directly through ACF, auschess.org rather than simply doing their own. Ive had a look and apart from CV, the rest leave a fair bit to be desired. This would unify Australian chess more. Half the time websites have been updated for months-years. A tighter network between associations is required for australian chess to imrove.

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 12:06 PM
I am a keen player from Victoria but have a concern regarding all of Australia. Wouldn't it be better if all state associations could run their websites directly through ACF, auschess.org rather than simply doing their own. Ive had a look and apart from CV, the rest leave a fair bit to be desired. This would unify Australian chess more. Half the time websites have been updated for months-years. A tighter network between associations is required for australian chess to imrove.

A good point Doc, u, ment to make.
(Sorry, could not resist that).

We had a proliferation occur at Club level with the VIC OPEN, and the Box Hill site. Fortunately we now have consolidated back to 1 for
Box Hill
VIC OPEN
Whitehorse.

The point you make deserves consideration. Perhaps if ChessVICTORIA could publish a schedule of charges for hosting other STATES sites?

starter

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 12:13 PM
I am a keen player from Victoria but have a concern regarding all of Australia. Wouldn't it be better if all state associations could run their websites directly through ACF, auschess.org rather than simply doing their own. Ive had a look and apart from CV, the rest leave a fair bit to be desired.
You must be joking.
Then again you are a mexican.


This would unify Australian chess more. Half the time websites have been updated for months-years.
That isnt really correct.
I know the NSWCA website is usually updated at least weekly.
Other association websites are also updated on a regular basis.


A tighter network between associations is required for australian chess to imrove.
That has nothing really to do with hosting all the associations websites on the acf site.
After all it isnt like paulb would be responsible for the content of the states web pages.
They would all be maintained by their states respective webmasters.


Anyway if someone from NSW really wants to know whats happening tournament wise in Victoria they can always find out from either the ACF bulletin or navigating with a single click from the ACF web site.

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 12:19 PM
You must be joking.
Then again you are a mexican.


Which hat are you wearing for this comment Bill?

1 NSW President?
or
2 Ratings Officer
or
3 BB pundit
or
4 NSW axis of condescension

starter

arosar
26-08-2004, 12:30 PM
I have to say that I actually feel for doc on this one. I'm not sure what Bill's on about.

AR

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 12:41 PM
Which hat are you wearing for this comment Bill?

1 NSW President?
or
2 Ratings Officer
or
3 BB pundit
or
4 NSW axis of condescension

starter
For that particular comment BB pundit.

A mexican thinks the mexican web site is fine but all the others are lacking.
Sounds objective to me.

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 12:47 PM
I have to say that I actually feel for doc on this one. I'm not sure what Bill's on about.

AR
Amiel mate, as a non volunteer you may not appreciate it ;) but someone has to do the actual work.
It would be interesting to know if the doc is more than just a keen player and actually is a volunteer or is just prepared to "volunteer" additional work for existing volunteer workers.
Now it would not be reasonable to expect paulb to have to handle all the state associations web pages and content.
Therefore they would be maintained by the respective state associations webmasters.
As such the content and layout of the respective state association web pages would no doubt remain the same.

In that case whats the difference between a web page for say CV being on the actual ACF server with a link on the main page as opposed to the current situation where there is a link on the main page to the CV server.

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 01:03 PM
For that particular comment BB pundit.

A mexican thinks the mexican web site is fine but all the others are lacking.
Sounds objective to me.

Thanks Bill. Just checking for confirmation.
So, hat #4 it is. :rolleyes:

starter

Garvinator
26-08-2004, 01:04 PM
is just prepared to "volunteer" additional work for existing volunteer workers.
alot of ppl are keen for this volunteer job ;)

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 01:16 PM
Thanks Bill. Just checking for confirmation.
So, hat #4 it is. :rolleyes:

starter
No, hat #3.
If it was #4, I would have been heaps more condecending. ;)

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 01:19 PM
alot of ppl are keen for this volunteer job ;)
Thats because its the easiest. ;)

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 01:27 PM
Amiel mate, as a non volunteer you may not appreciate it ;) but someone has to do the actual work.
It would be interesting to know if the doc is more than just a keen player and actually is a volunteer or is just prepared to "volunteer" additional work for existing volunteer workers.

Bill
Doc headed his thread...too many web-sites. He is calling for rationalisation. I read his post #1 to use the ACF as an example only. Any other site/service would be in the spirit of rationalisation.
If you strip away your argument about the transfer of load to Paul B, and strip away the idea that it be voluntary rather than paid for, there may be a good idea lurking underneath. Have a think about it. Perhaps NSW could be the 'host'.


Now it would not be reasonable to expect paulb to have to handle all the state associations web pages and content.
Therefore they would be maintained by the respective state associations webmasters.
As such the content and layout of the respective state association web pages would no doubt remain the same.

Maybe not.

Perhaps there is value in adopting a best-of-breed approach and making it available for all states. For example; I challenge you to find a site that loads faster than the Box Hill site. But I would not defend the Box Hill site FORMAT. I am arguing that there is perhaps value in seeking the best of all parameters and then making available to all States.



In that case whats the difference between a web page for say CV being on the actual ACF server with a link on the main page as opposed to the current situation where there is a link on the main page to the CV server.

I would agree with you if this is all that happened on 'rationalisation'.

starter

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 01:40 PM
Bill
Doc headed his thread...too many web-sites. He is calling for rationalisation. I read his post #1 to use the ACF as an example only. Any other site/service would be in the spirit of rationalisation.
Nice try starter but thats not what he said.
He may have headed it too many web-sites but in the body of his post he said:
"Wouldn't it be better if all state associations could run their websites directly through ACF, auschess.org rather than simply doing their own."

All that apprently means is have the state associations web sites on the ACF server.

If he meant something different he should have been clearer.

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 02:33 PM
Nice try starter but thats not what he said.
He may have headed it too many web-sites but in the body of his post he said:
"Wouldn't it be better if all state associations could run their websites directly through ACF, auschess.org rather than simply doing their own."

All that apprently means is have the state associations web sites on the ACF server.

If he meant something different he should have been clearer.

Bill
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes.

If you read everything literally.
But...what about the germ of the idea underneath?

starter

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 02:40 PM
Bill
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes.

If you read everything literally.

I suspect your reading into it what you want and not what was intended by the author.


But...what about the germ of the idea underneath?
The trouble with germs is that you usually end up with some unwanted disease. ;)

skip to my lou
26-08-2004, 02:45 PM
The impression I got from doc's post is that he wanted to see a global website system for all state organisations.

I am ready to voluntarily develop the software that could support such a website system, though there are some requirements:

ACF must organise and co-ordinate the operation.
ACF must pay for web hosting capable of supporting PHP + MySQL and must have sufficient web space. (roughly AUD$15/mo)

I can develop such a system in roughly 3 months after it has been requested by George or Paul.

It will take no technical knowledge from state organisations to update their website.

doc
26-08-2004, 02:49 PM
Sorry Bill but Starter's right here on this one.This is a call for rationalisation.
The essence of my point is for a greater infrastructure between states and perhaps one avenue to achieve this is through a "standardisation" of all websites etc. There are many possibilites where we can bring together resources, put aside differences (NSW/Vic) and actually produce a better result at the other end.
However, Bill, I agree that i should have been clearer and titled the thread something more appropriate.

Garvinator
26-08-2004, 02:52 PM
arent there already links on the acf webpage to each state and territories websites? Why isnt this sufficent?

arosar
26-08-2004, 02:53 PM
ACF must organise and co-ordinate the operation.
ACF must pay for web hosting capable of supporting PHP + MySQL and must have sufficient web space. (roughly AUD$15/mo)

I can develop such a system in roughly 3 months after it has been requested by George or Paul.

It will take no technical knowledge from state organisations to update their website.

Mate, you can't just jump into these things. We'd want to see a concept definition, feasibility analysis, cost-benefit, scope of work, and project agreement.

Then you have to do a pilot. Then more analysis. And if OK to go, we go.

Overall, I think the idea ought to be explored. Well done to doc.

AR

doc
26-08-2004, 02:56 PM
The benefits with this idea are clear. If you help someone else up the hill, you reach the top yourself.

Similarly, there are reasons we became a nation in 1901 and did not remain separate colonies.

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 02:57 PM
The impression I got from doc's post is that he wanted to see a global website system for all state organisations.

I am ready to voluntarily develop the software that could support such a website system, though there are some requirements:

ACF must organise and co-ordinate the operation.
ACF must pay for web hosting capable of supporting PHP + MySQL and must have sufficient web space. (roughly AUD$15/mo)

I can develop such a system in roughly 3 months after it has been requested by George or Paul.

It will take no technical knowledge from state organisations to update their website.

Of course you could Jeo. And a mighty fine job you would do too. Now let us see if Bill will explore this more kindly than Doc's idea. You don't happen to live in NSW do you?


Here is your first 'user requirement' > Opens as fast as the Box Hill site. Can you achieve this SLA?

starter

skip to my lou
26-08-2004, 02:59 PM
The infrastructure has already been developed and its sitting there doing nothing. Do you remember Sesha? There will be a global ACF website and then each state organisation will run their own copy of sesha. Just an idea, cost is not much to run the system either (roughly $15/mo). I doubt it is something that requires such complex analysis.

So why 3 months? To develop sesha further to house all different types of websites.

doc
26-08-2004, 03:01 PM
The infrastructure has already been developed and its sitting there doing nothing. Do you remember Sesha? There will be a global ACF website and then each state organisation will run their own copy of sesha. Just an idea, cost is not much to run the system either (roughly $15/mo). I doubt it is something that requires such complex analysis.

So why 3 months? To develop sesha further to house all different types of websites.

What are we waiting for?

skip to my lou
26-08-2004, 03:04 PM
Here is your first 'user requirement' > Opens as fast as the Box Hill site. Can you achieve this SLA?

There are many factors when it comes to loading speed. I showed Paul earlier this year, how this very server (chesskit.com/chesschat.org) loads sites 10 to 30 times faster (depending on your connection) than the ACF server.

skip to my lou
26-08-2004, 03:05 PM
What are we waiting for?

One thing though, I am not going to go and further develop this program if no one is going to use it.

Bill Gletsos
26-08-2004, 03:07 PM
Mate, you can't just jump into these things. We'd want to see a concept definition, feasibility analysis, cost-benefit, scope of work, and project agreement.

Then you have to do a pilot. Then more analysis. And if OK to go, we go.

Overall, I think the idea ought to be explored. Well done to doc.

AR
As for it being a go ahead it really wouldnt be a consideration for the ACF at all unless the majority of the states were prepared to support the idea.
If I recall correctly the idea of the state associations web pages being part of the ACF web site was previously discussed but there was no enthusiastic support from the states.
Paulb can most likely provide more information with regards this.

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 03:47 PM
There are many factors when it comes to loading speed. I showed Paul earlier this year, how this very server (chesskit.com/chesschat.org) loads sites 10 to 30 times faster (depending on your connection) than the ACF server.

You have avoided the question K.
As fast as Box Hill?

skip to my lou
26-08-2004, 05:04 PM
What is the Box Hill url, what are their server specs, what datacenter is the server located in, how many websites are hosted on that server and what is the connectivity like?

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 05:25 PM
What is the Box Hill url, what are their server specs, what datacenter is the server located in, how many websites are hosted on that server and what is the connectivity like?

hi K.
Load http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/
and marvel at its speed (relative) to say the Malaysian site featured the past couple of days.

I am just a USER, your other questions are diversions from what a user requires of a good web-site.

regards
starter

skip to my lou
26-08-2004, 05:32 PM
hi K.
Load http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/
and marvel at its speed (relative) to say the Malaysian site featured the past couple of days.

I am just a USER, your other questions are diversions from what a user requires of a good web-site.

regards
starter

It most probably will not be as fast. The reason is because box hill site is static, while what I build will be dynamic (server needs to do much more processing). It won't be slow though.

Tell me, how fast does http://www.chesskit.com/ site load compared to box hill? For me, there is hardly any difference. I am on cable internet.

ursogr8
26-08-2004, 05:38 PM
It most probably will not be as fast. The reason is because box hill site is static, while what I build will be dynamic (server needs to do much more processing). It won't be slow though.

Tell me, how fast does http://www.chesskit.com/ site load compared to box hill? For me, there is hardly any difference. I am on cable internet.

K.

Both took 3 seconds on this LAN thingy I am on here at work (IBM/Telstra account).
The difference is very noticeable though on my 56K dial-up at home.

starter

skip to my lou
26-08-2004, 05:42 PM
Ok well, the speed you can expect is similar to www.chesskit.com - It will probably be slightly faster as it would get much less hits compared to chesskit.

Paul S
27-08-2004, 01:14 AM
I am a keen player from Victoria but have a concern regarding all of Australia. Wouldn't it be better if all state associations could run their websites directly through ACF, auschess.org rather than simply doing their own. Ive had a look and apart from CV, the rest leave a fair bit to be desired. This would unify Australian chess more. Half the time websites have been updated for months-years. A tighter network between associations is required for australian chess to imrove.

Thanks for the laugh, Doc.

Based on the few times I have looked at the CV website, I find it rather user unfriendly. Overall I think the NSWCA website is better than the CV website.

You complain about the State chess association websites not being up to date, but have you ever botherered to look at the ACF website? What about the "Columns" section that hasn't been updated for 2 months? Or the ACF Bullletins section, which, while showing the current one, doesn't show any for the last 2 months? Yet you want the ACF to take over the running of the State Chess Association websites aswell? You're kidding! If the ACF is unable/unwilling (I suspect that Paul B is probably "burnt out" in the role and is only doing it becasue nobody else will) to ensure its own website is up to date, then how will it cope with all the State Associations websites aswell?

paulb
30-08-2004, 09:23 PM
I am a keen player from Victoria but have a concern regarding all of Australia. Wouldn't it be better if all state associations could run their websites directly through ACF, auschess.org rather than simply doing their own. Ive had a look and apart from CV, the rest leave a fair bit to be desired. This would unify Australian chess more. Half the time websites have been updated for months-years. A tighter network between associations is required for australian chess to imrove.

This issue has been considered often.

My view is that what matters is not that all the websites reside on the same server, nor that they all share the same address, but that they are *easily* and *mutually* accessible via prominent links. The ACF site has links to all the states fairly clearly on the homepage and the links page.

We toyed with opening up the ACF site to all and sundry but there were considerable practical problems with this, and the ISP indicated that we were using up a bit too much space, so that has ended now.

Cheers - PaulB