Do We Want A Website?

[Silk]

So, we now have a new mailing list over at readingexcuses.com thanks to Strider. Of course, readingexcuses.com is also a website address...

Which currently doesn't lead anywhere.

So, we can do the lazy thing, and point it to this board. And well, you all know me, I'm all for lazy.

(I'm not proposing that we move the discussion boards elsewhere, or to change the way we currently operate our critiques. This would be like supplemental content. Also, no promises at this point--if there is something that we want to do, someone would have to organize it, etc, and there are only so many hours in a day.)

So if there's anything you're particularly dying to see on a theoretical Reading Excuses website, post it below.

[stridera]

Currently redirects here.

Some options:
A 'updates' blog that allows us to post best practices/tips.  We can also use it to post images/stories/etc.

Another option, for some of our better known users who are starting well but can't afford a webpage, we can add stuff like username.readingexcuses.com.  (Only those who need it though, since I don't want my bandwidth to get out of control.   I'm more than glad to help those who need it.

[Chaos]

The easiest thing would be to do a Wordpress blog. I like Wordpress's interface a lot, and I especially like having a couple of easy-to-access pages right from the index page (like on my site, with the About and Samples pages).

In my mind, it could be fun to do a weekly blog, probably on Monday, saying who is submitting. That'd give us (read: me) the motivation to write blog entries. We could also regularly link to new Writing Excuses episodes that are good.

[Silk]

A blog that just lists whoever's posting this week seems kind of pointless to me. :/ We already do that here.

It might be kind of neat to do some sort of writing resources kind of thing. But whatever we do, we want to make sure we're kind to Strider's bandwith.

[sortitus]

As long as we keep the site graphics-free the bandwidth will likely stay reasonable. If we have the site, perhaps we should use it as a tool for members who have passed submissions through the system to get alpha readers or something. You know, with our name being Reading Excuses, we have a lot more writers than readers. If we could get some more exclusive readers, the name would be more accurate. I dunno.

If the submissions were hosted on a private blog there, it would make reading a bit easier in some ways. Then we'd also have a back-catalog of submissions, could edit issues as they arise, etc. Then again, a better and less bandwidth-intensive way to do this is for every member to just make a blog on one site that is read-on-invitation only. Then (at least with Wordpress) the posts would be listed in the friends page. But that smells an awful lot like a private forum with locked groups. Bleh.

You guys get what my mind is thinking, right?

[Chaos]

I get what you're saying, sortitus. The backlogging thing is difficult. I'd rather not post them up online at all.

Ironically I was thinking a few nights ago about a way to get alpha readers via RE. That would be a great idea.

A blog that just lists whoever's posting this week seems kind of pointless to me. :/ We already do that here.

No, the applications go here. If there was a blog, it would make it seem like Readingexcuses.com has regular activity, which would attract new members, as opposed to a site with not a lot of updates. That was my rationale there.

[Silk]

I imagine that getting an alpha reader through RE would be as simple as someone posting a message to the forum and asking.

Yeah, the backlog thing is kind of difficult, but I don't know that we'll find a better solution. I'd also be happier if we didn't post stuff actual text online (and I'd like to see us remain part of the TWG community) and when we were discussing GoogleGroups before, a lot of members said that they were happier to have control over back material--and it's easy enough to send it to interested parties.

Chaos, I don't really understand what would be going on this theoretical blog of yours...

RE: bandwith, if this theoretical website of ours ever became more than a theory, in the interests of Strider's bandwith, we could also park the domain to a free server. (Erik claims he knows of some that don't suck!) Just sayin'.

[sortitus]

I think that the best way to get readers would not be to advertise with Writing Excuses, but with a book review 'cast. The listeners of WE are naturally going to be writers, which isn't bad, but we're linked on WE anyway. We'll get writers at the same rate we've been getting them as long as the 'cast continues, but if we want more readers we need something else. Perhaps Steve would link us on his new blog? It may some day have traffic, if it doesn't already.

I've got a brother who works at a hosting company, and though I don't get any discount of any kind, I could ask him who's good (to which he'd say for me to host myself with my spare desktop and my current connection).

On the blogging thing again, if we have any members who feel that they have something that is publishable, we could blog it and hope it gets hits. This is the longest shot at publishing in the world. Now if we could just get some name brand authors to join the group, I'm sure we'd be inundated with readers. *pointed look at our parents*

[Silk]

I'd be a little uncomfortable with inviting a whole bunch of "readers" to join us, just because there would be no real limit on how big such a group might get, and I'm not really sure I'd want to be sending my work out to really large numbers of people. As is we have nearly fifty people on the email list.

[sortitus]

We could artificially limit membership if it gets out of hand, but I'm just talking the future. As it is, the group seems to be a comfortable size, though unfortunately not an end-all solution to all problems revision.

[Frog]

Just to be difficult, I am going to say that I like the group the way it is. I mean, adding an email list or some such isn't that big of deal, but I am happy with the amount of readers/critiquers/submits and our current system of sending out back chapters. Since people come and go in activity, I like the occasional stream of newbies we get, but I wouldn't want to see our list bloated with 'readers.' Fellow writers usually have better technical insight anyway and I like reading everyone's stuff and chatting with them too!
We've always been open for people to post question or requests for things like alpha reads (I seem to recall being turned down earlier this week ) so I am just putting in my vote for the lazy way and keeping as much the same as possible.

[stridera]

Don't worry about my bandwidth.  I was saying that mostly tongue in cheek.  My friend actually owns the hosting site and treats me well.  If I need more bw, I can upgrade it easily.  (I was basically saying I can create sites for people but might get trampled when everyone here becomes awesome elite writers, because we know it's all going to happen!)

As far as the backlog goes, I was thinking docs would be a better place for that, but it would require people to have a login to view it.  Basically you can put all your chapters up there and only give access to other people as you wish.  This keeps it secure/hidden/and (somewhat) easily accessible.  If we want something more extensible, I am a pretty good programmer... not much of a designer though

[sortitus]

I know how to draw lines. If you get somebody who can draw curves, we've got a team.

[stridera]

lol... here is the beginning of a website I was making for myself... and was promptly told it sucks by my web designer friends.   They keep promising they'll make me a site, but they've been saying that for a year now... heh.

http://stridera.com/index.php/test/
What do you think?  Is it as bad as they say?

[Silk]

It looks fine to me, but then I've lost track of how many people have said that to me about MY website.

(Well, they haven't exactly said it "sucked". They said it was boring. And then they all offer to make graphics for me. I've not taken the hint yet. )

Oh, except yours doesn't have any content