my take on the 'where is hitrecord going?' debate
so having spent way too much time reading all the disussions on this, i have some thoughts - i'll just throw them out there. i also left this as a remark in joe's response, but i figured since you started the discussion, you might also be interested (i'd also like to see what lawrie thinks given that he's the one really pushing for something like this!)
the two strands of the discussion came about as: organisation and structure. being able to find things and not have great gems of ideas slipping through the cracks, and structure in how things eventually pan out. the first one was pretty much agreed on as having a random button. sweet, problem solved. the second is a bit trickier. my take on it:
for more organisation with collabs, why not have a hybrid submission/vote system by the community. by which i mean, in addition to what is already there, the more 'serious' hitrecorders who want to do something 'big' can submit a more thorough, detailed proposal of their project complete with deadline, goals, (hitrecord) resources they need, etc etc.
every week/month/quarter whatever, all these (ie no backroom 'greenlighting') are featured/posted somewhere on the website. the community can have a poll, people get to choose which one they would like to see put in for further development, and interested hitrecorders can offer their skills. (collabs which dont win join the rest of the website?)
in my mind this balances the question of people who feel that they need to justify their (time) investment by giving them a greater amount of exposure on the site (that way if no one signs up for the project, its because no one is interested, and not because no one saw it) and the people who are signing up for it are secure knowing that something will come out of it (thus solving the frustrating problem of good ideas petering out) because its a driven, motivated project for all parties involved, rather than the typical 'throw it out there, see what happens' approach (which is fine, its just not always as efficient as some people would like apparently).
plus the added bonus of hR.org knowing theres a guaranteed finished output coming their way.
the two strands of the discussion came about as: organisation and structure. being able to find things and not have great gems of ideas slipping through the cracks, and structure in how things eventually pan out. the first one was pretty much agreed on as having a random button. sweet, problem solved. the second is a bit trickier. my take on it:
for more organisation with collabs, why not have a hybrid submission/vote system by the community. by which i mean, in addition to what is already there, the more 'serious' hitrecorders who want to do something 'big' can submit a more thorough, detailed proposal of their project complete with deadline, goals, (hitrecord) resources they need, etc etc.
every week/month/quarter whatever, all these (ie no backroom 'greenlighting') are featured/posted somewhere on the website. the community can have a poll, people get to choose which one they would like to see put in for further development, and interested hitrecorders can offer their skills. (collabs which dont win join the rest of the website?)
in my mind this balances the question of people who feel that they need to justify their (time) investment by giving them a greater amount of exposure on the site (that way if no one signs up for the project, its because no one is interested, and not because no one saw it) and the people who are signing up for it are secure knowing that something will come out of it (thus solving the frustrating problem of good ideas petering out) because its a driven, motivated project for all parties involved, rather than the typical 'throw it out there, see what happens' approach (which is fine, its just not always as efficient as some people would like apparently).
plus the added bonus of hR.org knowing theres a guaranteed finished output coming their way.
