Crowdfunding the creation of the next version of LFGSS

It's perfectly fine to share the link, it is public as James says.

However you should caveat it by stating that this is the earliest release and it will change very fast, and that there are known bugs and these will be addressed. And that within a month or two it will be very much ready to be used... whereas right now it is barely usable.

Just finished making the events form let you pick a place on a map, or to search for places using an input field.

Moving on to date pickers and then I can swing back round and attack the bugs.

Thanks. I'm building this https://sandbox.microcosm.app/microcosms/8/ to demonstrate.

Can I make a subforum (sub-microcosm) within the TABS microcosm?

Thanks. I'm building this https://sandbox.microcosm.app/microcosms/8/ to demonstrate.

Can I make a subforum (sub-microcosm) within the TABS microcosm?

No, Microcosms have only 1 level of nesting... within the site.

Whilst familiarity with existing software tends to suggest we should include support for hierarchies of Microcosms, it's well-known that most users find hierarchies to be a difficult concept. This is pretty much why Apple try and hide the whole concept of a file system on iOS devices, hierarchies actually aren't easy, intuitive concepts.

So what we're going to try and champion, is the thought of Microcosms being a list, no different from how the items within a Microcosm are a list.

People get lists, and they like them.

So we're pushing that as the key concept unless we get really strong feedback from users (rather than people who wish to become admins) that this is not the right path.

I understand this but won't these lists become very long and difficult navigate?
We also would wish to have certain topics discussed only by a small group (I know you said to ask this a feature request through github which I haven't registered yet) but i suspect this will be of major importance. I didn't exploit google circles much as that was clunky but the potential of this feature even from the alpha is obvious

We haven't finished building it.

Microcosms will allow for privacy... select members only. And items within that would inherit those permissions.

If you set up a Microcosm for cycle trainers in Birmingham and only invite them, then only they could discuss things, access it, and so forth.

There is no limit on the number of Microcosms you can have, though practically I think an average usable number will just emerge from observing how sites use them.

For Microcosms themselves, these will be subscribeable, and searchable (no-one has commented on the lack of search yet). You'll be able to see which ones you have subscribed to or participated in, and find other ones that you have permission to see.

Just as lists of items have never become unwieldy, I believe that a list of Microcosms won't be either. The same mechanisms to find threads and topics, and keep track of them will apply to Microcosms.

Weren't you planning something like filtering by tags (instead of fixed hierarchies as with forums and sub-forums)?

Weren't you planning something like filtering by tags (instead of fixed hierarchies as with forums and sub-forums)?

We still are.

Those are basically parts of the search functionality that doesn't yet exist.

To be able to say "Only show me Events within a Microcosm"... or "Only show me Microcosms that contain the word 'foo'".

Filters are just a form of search. And we haven't yet addressed search.

Search isn't a really difficult thing, but it can be made near impossible if the structure of the things you're searching keeps changing. So we've punted search out a bit to fix all of the bugs and to allow the core of Microcosm to settle down and stop changing so much.

In order to migrate an existing forum, I'd want to be able to show a "landing page" of selected microcosms/

In order to migrate an existing forum, I'd want to be able to show a "landing page" of selected microcosms/

Microcosms will be sorted by popularity (by default, when it's implemented).

Though there's no reason why an admin couldn't "sticky" them, I'll add it as a feature request.

Could you clarify that.

If you mean... on the home page the Microcosms at the top should be able to be specified by the site admin. Then cool, yes.

Just as threads can be sticky on LFGSS, Microcosms can be sticky on the list of Microcosms... so the key on-topic and essential ones can be forced to the top of the home page and the niche ones can follow.

Is that what you mean? And/Or does that answer it?

https://github.com/microcosm-cc/microweb/issues/35

I've added a 'more detail required' label.

Microcosms will be sorted by popularity (by default, when it's implemented).

Though there's no reason why an admin couldn't "sticky" them, I'll add it as a feature request.

It's already implemented in the database, and the bug for the "sort order" will resolve handling stickies too.

Just logged on with a new address and changed my username to #£#$#
It doesn't seem to work now. I broke it ;(

I'll add that as a bug.

Is that what you mean? And/Or does that answer it?

I imagine LFGSS will display a subset of all Microcosms.
My forum currently has a number of sections, one of which is private.
When I switch it to run on Microcosm, I want the "forum" link from my CMS to show a list of "our" sections, rather than just linking to Microco.sm's big index of microcosms.

The list of Microcosms will show all Microcosms, but paginated much like the list of Items is (or threads on here).

People will only see in the list the items that they have permission to see.

If a private Microcosm is stickied to the first page, then only those with permission to see it will see it, others would not.

Linking to the big index of Microcosms shouldn't expose private ones to those who could not access them.

LFGSS will display a list of all Microcosms, with a handful of on-topic ones stickied to ensure that the site topic/tone is put across first and foremost (that Miscellaneous isn't the top Microcosm).

I'm not sure what the forum link in your CMS does... just one hyperlink? A dropdown of specific forums? But in the case of the latter this surely could be replicated by a query to the API to find Microcosms that meet some defined criteria and listing them on the dropdown using the API reply.

And if we're still on crossed-wires... moar info!

^ &^^ guessing cross-wires on the overarching homepage for Microcosm and the homepage for Emyr's forum should he run it on Microcosm?

I'm not sure what the forum link in your CMS does... just one hyperlink?

http://mhbp.co.uk/forum lists a number of sections: General, Sessions, Equipment, Tournaments. We don't really use layers below these.

I would want users posting in these forums to be aware that they are MHBP sections.

I would not want to make other non-MHBP sections visible at http://mhbp.co.uk/forum without proper planning, especially as that has potential to be a culture clash.

Is the alpha is still broken or is that just me?

Sorry, something bad happened when we tried to process your request. The error has been logged and we'll look into it.

Click to go back to the homepage.

Powered by Microcosm

That's simple enough... stick just the official ones, and we'll make sure search queries and filters work via the command line.

So that if you embed you could just have "?search=sticky:true" (or something like that) only return the filtered list.

It will be possible for a site admin to prevent people creating Microcosms. So alternatively you could do that.

However, I've seen that the best engagement from people has been because they've been able to create forums for their needs, and those needs always start small and grow. i.e. Polo, Ladies, Track, etc on here.

So if you do choose to restrict permissions such that only an admin can create Microcosms, then you really should be listening to what the community needs are.

Example, I could imagine that polo teams within a community actually might want to create their own little space to discuss tactics, training, secret weapons, etc.

So I'd probably advocate just using the sticky and filter so that way you don't restrict what users can do too much. The choice is wholly yours though.

I think I might have actually answered your question this time.

Is the alpha is still broken or is that just me?

The bugs still exist.

If it's your username that broke things, clearing the cookie for sandbox.microcosm.app will log you back out.

^ &^^ guessing cross-wires on the overarching homepage for Microcosm and the homepage for Emyr's forum should he run it on Microcosm?

my vote. I had this for a while too.

Should the cookies be cleared on exit like on lfgss?

I think I might have actually answered your question this time.

Cool, you could have a demo site showing how a non-LFGSS site replatforming from a traditional forum package would see "their" microcosms (and microcosms created by users viewing the world of microcosms through a "their site" lens).

Should the cookies be cleared on exit like on lfgss?

At the moment, by default, you remain logged in until you log out.