To fund the UCCan so they can spend $10K to update the site to Drupal 7? No thanks, we'll just be here again in 5 years.

If someone is willing to export the forum to simple forum software, and not try to re-create WC.ca which is way too complicated for what we use it for, I'd consider.

no post

no post

I think once we have an idea of where we are going, then, we can figure out how much we will need, etc.

I have reached out to uc can about discussion ; however, due to other projects in flow, we aren't #1.  To be fair, it isn't also an immediate need for us.  I'm thinking January will be fine for this dialogue.

Hi kaythecurler,

On Chansen's previous thread, I was cautioned against financial questions: I refer you to "Technical discussion about transferring WC to a new forum" (located in Social).

In that thread, you will see that Chansen and Mandella are looking into free forum platforms. 

You will see questions and issues of transferring WC (history) data to a new site, should UCCan release WC data.

You will see that Chansen is working hard at a free forum site, but also is pondering the questions: who owns the site and who manages it?

Pinga wrote on that thread:

"? wait? i'm trying to make it look complicated?

I am not comfortable with someone hosting it on a server in their basement.

I want patch management on the site.

I'd like upgrades to software as it comes along being done by the "software as service" provider.

I'd like uccan oversight in some way.  I have confidence and an understanding of what the service and what the sense of relationshp was with the admins which is different than Chansen's.    

It's part of the uccan connectivity that keeps me here.

So, I am not in the spot where we need grant money or fulltime resources, however, I am also not looking at free....."

I

Pinga then committed to reaching out to the powers that be.  I do not know how that contact was made, but Pinga reported back that the fate of WC was not the #1 priority at this time - and fair enough.

The decision has been made: UCCan has already called an end date to WC. 

It is doubtful that UCCan will transfer data (history/knowledge/information) contained in the current WC site.

Chansens and Mandella are professionals in the field, and are looking into free forum possibilities.  Pinga does not like the idea of someone hosting a site "in their basement". - but if there is no data migration, then why should that matter?

It is clear that UCCan has made a decision to discontinue WC - reaching out is not going to make a difference:ROI has not panned out - surely those with a purely business sense can understand that.

SO a couple of people are looking at a free forum scenario, but it will take lots of volunteers to commit.

Or Pinga's model, which is not free, will require money, but" not ready to consider grants", which have, application deadlines typically in March 2014 and June 2014...and, oh, wait for it, WC will be gone in the meantime. 

So the need to apply for grant funding in a Pinga based scenario, where funding is required, and where UCCan clearly is not going to reverse its position, is NOW.

It is highly unlikely that a new version of WC operated outside of the purview of UCCan will sustain itself through membership funding. (And who would manage the funds?)

So, if there is any potential for keeping this online community together, it most likey rests in a free form, hosted in "someone's basement", with a great many volunteers.

The alternative:  produce a budget,   convince UCCan to stay involved (BTW, the message is pretty clear that UCCan no longer wants to be involved), and seek, manage funding and operations oversight.  Anyone up for that F/T volunteer gig?

I tried to follow that thread, it got long.  Has that been verified?  I also asked about whether this site could remain accessible for viewing while not being active in 2 threads.  I didn't see an answer about that.

Professionals in what field?  I thought they were in 2 different fields.  I agree with Pinga, although I probably do go to sites where I'm not careful enough.  Especially when it comes to future PMs, I would like to know there's some security.  WC is one of a small number of sites where I've shared my home address.

Lol, I have worked in IT for 25 years though would not consider myself an expert in forum software or delivery of service

Chemgal, yes the request to discuss the topic has been forwarded to united church contacts. Due to the launch of other activities I do not expect a quick response

Double posted

I think that Mandella is a sysop.  I believe in other threads Chansen has revealed that he also has history in that field.  I cannot say for certain, but it seems that Pinga also works in the same field.

There is nothing to LOL about a new site, Pinga.  If your vision of new , continued WC is to exist, it will require funding.  And it is highly unlikely that UCCan will be a part of it, and certainly not throw money at it.

And if one wants to seek any kind of grant, then the work has to be done now.

The alternative is a free forum site, of which you, Pinga, have raised concerns.

RedHead, if you are so gungho to put together a grant, start a thead, and work out what you need to know and ask for input.

No one is stopping you or anyone else....drive the dialogue.start a thread.

I'm all for it. I don't know grants, so I'm not the person to do this. I can set up a forum, though it's not close to my profession.

My point from earlier is we don't even know what form any new site will take, or what the costs will be. We need to know what db info the UCCan would ve willing to transfer, if any. I've suggested public forum posts only, with no personal information or personal messages migrating. I've not heard back, but I'm giving them time.

If we get the go-ahead to do a transfer of info, we could have a basic forum up within days, though I hope we get more time than that. Costs depend on a lot of factors. I'm perfectly happy with free forum software and inexpensive shared hosting solutions. Some don't seem to be. I could support paid software and more expensive hosting, but then you're looking at funding questions.

Redhead, if you want to tackle funding, go for it.

Not quite a sysop, though I have much of the requisite skill set. I've been managing IT systems, first in a public library then in a home health company, for 20+ years.

Mendalla

I'm not an IT professional, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

There is lots to lol about Redhead. including your quoting me.  

Again, if you would like to put a proposal together with staff, etc, go for it.

Personally I'm surprised that no one has suggested a bake sale yet to save Wondercafe. The UCCanada is pretty good at running bake sales... bazaars... rummage sales... white elephant sales... stawberry teas...

Pinga, you always take it to a personal level - and that shows a weakness.  It is your idea that a new forum will cost money, that you want some UCCan involvement, that you do not want someone running it in "their basement". 

So You do the math. 

I already tried to ask questions and get information.  And I have already been told that it is not necessary.

I merely pointed   out what you wrote.  So stand by it, and put forward your own suggestions about how to fund what you see for a a new WC forum beyond June 2014.

And I would very much appreciate it if you would stop attacking me, personally, and stick to the topic. "There is lots to lol about redhead" is rude and it shows how you choose to argue, Pinga.

wtf are you talking about redhead? I take it to a personal level? you're funny. Please re-read that sentence and see that if I had remembered my comma, it would have been, there is lots to lol about, redhead .  I get that you have a hate on for me right now.  As I said, go for the funding model, start to lay all the questions out you need. i am sure people will be happy to engage.

The initial estimates of costs were between $100and $500.  Enough that a couple of us said we could foot the bill without too much effort for at least the first year, and then have time to figure out how to go about funding in future. Funding that amount of money seemed to be the least of our concerns compared to data retrieival, model of support, etc.

Yeah, you forget to use commas often, Pinga.  And I do not have a a hate on for you, personally, rather you have proven in this thread, and others, that you have a complete disrespect for anything I write.

And, conveniently, once again, you deflect through attack.

So, as I refer to your own thoughts, quoted above, here are the questions:

Where do you propose that the hardware operating a new version of WC be housed, if not in " someone's basement"? 

Who owns the new site?

You suggest that the costs would be $100 - $500 for the first year - for what? 

And, again, who is going to manage all of this? 

And if it it is volunteer-driven, there will, ultimately, still need to be someone managing it.

Redhead, somehow you missed or continue to miss, possibly because you don't realize how cheap this stuff can be.

The software that I modelled was running as a service on hosted servers at that company.  The total cost, including license, servers, patching of that software was under $500/year.  Total cost.   We have discussed the volunteer driven already as well.  As Chansen indicated to you, many groups run these forums for years on volunteers. it is not complex.  Yes, there is often an group or board, the vision holders/board/exeuctive/team/guidmasters/etc.  

Thanks, Pinga, for explaining this.

Actually, Pinga, the discussion around volunteers has not been addressed . 

How many volunteers?

What roles?

What is the dedicated time commitment ?

These issues have not been addressed.

Agreed, it hasn't

Sigh.  I wish I hadn't started this bit of discussion.

To be honest, forum threads are not the best way to hash this stuff out. We really should set up a group chat, conference call, or other such forum and have a proper meeting. And if we are going to do that, we need to know if the UCCan is interested in supporting the effort (allowing us to import the WC archives, etc.) since if they are, they should be there. So, we aren't ready for that, yet.

Mendalla

Well it kinda did, but to no specifics. We were discussing how folks do it informally now

Agreed, mendella

Kay, do not be sorry

See, to me, those are the specifics you hash out after you decide the big questions about ownership, db migration, software platform, hosting, etc. The you can worry about costs and funding. Then it's the questions above.

When enough people want to take part in a forum, finding admins and mods is not difficult. Sometimes, you have to remove admins or mods because they're either absent or go off on power trips, but mostly, by my experience, it works out.

Don't sweat the small stuff.

Okay, I am not going to sweat the small stuff, such as how volunteer driven sites are managed, or sites that cost money, or establishing a board.

When June rolls around, and WC ceases to exist, then I guess that Pinga, Mendella and Chansen, and hopefully many others, will have a virtual solution in place. 

What is clear: WC will cease June 2014.  Decision made.

How a new virtual site that uplifts and holds the WC community is in the hands and minds of those who are far more experienced in the tech world than me.  Funding does not seem to be an issue. so I am out.  My guess, though, is that funding is an issue, and that is why UCCan is also opting out.

I don't sweat the small stuff: I do see how projects roll out.

A new volunteer driven site will require management. Or, a managed site will require funding, and then it will require a volunteer to manage funds.

I did not create these scenarios: I only asked questions and offered to help.  But my offer is not seen as important or necessary - and so I have nothing to offer.  Wish all of you the best to sort out the virtual future of a re-incarnated WC.

Fine. Right now, to the best of our knowledge, the cost is somewhere between $100/yr and $20,000/yr. With that information, go work on funding and see how far you get.

I'm a proponent of tackling questions in some sort of order. If you want to sort out funding and admin questions before we have any clue what we will need to spend or how the site will be split off from the UCCan, go for it. I think you'll be spinning your wheels, but I'm not about to stop you. I just can't answer those questions yet, but I don't think they'll be insurmountable, so I'm not worried about them.

If Wondercafe could be continued for such a small investment of money, why on earth is it being shut down? 

Is the present site too ambitious, i.e. does it have too many features? We don't seem to use the groups or the friends options much at all. Does anyone know how often the church search is used? 

And of course, there is still the issue of advertising. Some posters have suggested advertising would not be necessary, of course. The advertising campaign was a big cost associated with the original start-up. 

There is a significant difference in price for a site that was designed to support national advertising campaigns for an entity (ie United church of Canada), and one that is used by a small community.  That price differential occurs both in startup and in ongoing support costs.  That is partially why the difference Paradox3.

Hi Pinga, 

Hmm .... yes, that makes sense.

But I guess I am wondering about why would continue wondercafe as a "small community".  Not sure I see the point. 

Oddest thing ever. If I log out of wondecafe, the post I just made disappears. Log back in and there it is!

umm, there are people here who wish to continue posting together. In the absence of wondercafe, they cannot

Yes, I know that Pinga. I am saddened myself about losing this site. But I am wondering if in the absence of advertising, the new wondercafe (or whatever it is called) will become more like a little club of people who used to hang out here. If we are not going to attract many newcomers the whole beauty of wondercafe.ca might be lost. 

I can almost see Facebook sufficing but it certainly isn't great for ongoing discussion. And we would have to give up the relative anonymity we enjoy here.

Paradox3, there hasn't been advertising for a while.

Advertising has continued to be placed in the Observer, Pinga. But you are right, not in any mainstream media. 

For what it's worth, I am with RedHead on some of this. IT WILL COST MONEY. Everything does in this age.Where are the volunteers going to come from - that is one of the laments of all United Churches - The volunteers are worn out.Or am I missing something - will this site have nothing to do with the United Church?

Hi Crazyheart, 

I think it will depend a lot on what we are trying to achieve with a continuing wondercafe or wondercafe-like site. 

How much advertising do other successful forums have?

CH, there are two other threads going in Church Life started by Pinga. One looks at having an affiliation with the UCCan, the other at going completely independent. Each has its own ramifications for how things are going to be done and funded. So it may or may not. Depends on the UCCan as much as anything we decide.

I would also point out that of the potential volunteer sysadmins who have been hashing away at the technical stuff, only one (Pinga) is UCCan. The other two are chansen (unchurched atheist) and me (UU, albeit ex-UCCan). Make of that what you will. I would assume that if UCCan does get involved, they will want to see more UCCan members in roles (at least on whatever passes for a board).

Mendalla

Thanks for your answers. It helped.

Exactly. So much is dependent upon what the UCCan decides, assuming they even tell us or want to work with any group of us at all. They could just clam up and not do anything, and be well within their rights.

And I never even considered that they wouldn't want me involved because I'm an atheist. They invited atheists to WC. It's not like I've ever worshipped Satan or anything, or that I would abuse any admin powers that I was granted, assuming I'm granted any. Who here really thinks I'd act any differently with admin than I do without it?

What I see as a project roll out:

Under a new domain: e.g. wondrouscafe.ca or wonderbistro.com or some such name.

As to operation and oversight, if it is volunteer driven, then people have to assume roles and time commitments.   Be serious and discuss what is needed, in terms of of dedicated volunteer hours.

If it is outsourced, volunteers will need to raise funds, or pay out of pocket.  And manage funding - do not kid yourself: as CH wrote: IT WILL COST MONEY.

UCCan is walking away from WC.  Data transfer is highly unlikely.  IP issues abound as well. 

These are questions and issues that matter now with regard to setting up a new site.

Creating a temporary test site perhaps, is a good start.  Building a solid foundation for a new site is better - and that starts with people, an understanding of costs and technology, because, at the end of the day, a virtual community is based upon people involvement.

UCCan has already made its decision.Why do people think UCCan will stray from its position: WC is fininshed - ROI not good enough.

A new virtual community is a great idea - there are on-line friendships and support systems born here and are held dearly by many.

Just be realistic:  costs and volunteerism will require dedicated management.  And these are issues to be addressed now, not later.

How much?

Quite simply, we could register a domain and start using the forum I installed, with a new template to make it look pretty, and we could do it tomorrow. Total cost? Less than $20/month. Many online communities operate with smaller budgets than that.

I think you're needlessly complicating this.

Why don't we wait for that answer and try to figure out if there is a way that answer could be "yes"? Why start out being negative?

Nailing down costs is important. We're trying to establish what they will be. Management isn't my worry at the moment. I think it can be sorted out later, but if you want to address it, address it. Find some examples of how other sites are managed and get back to us. Start a thread. Don't complain that we haven't looked at it and sit on your hands.

wow, guys, I agree with Mandella that a group chat would work much better than this back & forth.  

 (Google hangouts is one I've learned to use recently, and Basecamp is a good spot to organize the ideas into a plan)

So - it sounds like 2 or 3 of you could make a project list - to-dos, task schedule, etc and then compare - soon enough there is a schedule of to-dos and we're off & running.

I think there is grant money for this, no problem, and I've recently met people who know more about these things.

1 - come together with your own lists of to-dos & ideas

2 - form it into some plan

3- ownership/leadership questions - volunteers & staff need some accountability to someone

3 - look up grant resources (Yes, the UCC has some)

4 - look up paid options (b/c free has some limitations)

5-  be nice to each other - we're all hoping for the same thing (reasonably).  

6- ask nicely if we could take over the name.  Why would anyone say NO?

And tell United Future why online community really matters - they want to hear about it on Thursday in a webinar.  really really, they do.  www.unitedfuture.ca  

How much clearer can I be?

I have addressed the issues: volunteer time and tech costs.   I have asked those who have much more knowledge to provide information - I am informed enough to ask the questions, I am not informed enough to have the answers.

Frankly, healthwise, I am not going to be around much longer - I can't be a dedicated volunteer, but those volunteer roles have to be worked out, as does ownership of a new site.  But I do appreciate,respect and believe in a future WC -ish site.  I believe that this online community is really valuable, supportive and most of all, caring.

And we've answered repeatedly that many forums operate just fine with volunteer admins, and we don't know the costs because we don't know what info and/or support we'd receive from the UCCan. I've never known a populated forum be short of volunteers for moderator. Ever.

How often do you think WC.ca is staffed? How many hours do you think Aaron puts in here? My guess is less than 2 hours per week. What's yours?

I've been part of online communities and forums since about 1997. I've bought shared webserver space and acted as a forum mod and server admin for a forum that was more active than this one. It worked out just fine.

If you don't know much about this stuff, asking questions is fine. But please stop being so negative and demanding answers after we've told you we don't know yet. It's like you want to sabotage this, and you're wearing out the few members with the technical ability to pull this off.

Birthstone, the question is one of the questions to be posed to staff at United Church of Canada.

Clearly the Dec 5th online forum is a key deliverable for the organization, and so, rightfully, we are in the queue for time.

Why would anyone say no?

Well, for one thing, if we go bad, ie, poor admin, moderation etc, that could put a bad spin on the United Church of Canada. They may wish to break any connection for legal reasons as well.

They invested significant dollars in the wondercafe brand.  It may be something they wish to keep for future usage.