I’d love to have your thoughts on how to make this community intuitive and simple to use. I think that starts with the right category names, and a good naming convention, logic and best practices for using tags. Maybe also a recommended naming convention for topics in each category.
As for the categories, I wonder if the current categories are intuitive, and maybe if they are too many, and we’d need fewer.
Based on the initial conversation in Tutorial Hub, maybe it should be converted into Deep Dives. The topic we have there currently:
How to create a visual first Daily Note workflow,
Using ExcaliBrain as your Visual Map of all your notes,
Building a Visual Icon Library
These all go beyond just being a simple tutorial topic. Each of them can be a deep dive conversation, and maybe later a short self-paced course, possibly co-created with some of the community members.
Let me know what you think. Let’s shape the community together.
Well, to be honest, for me the first impression of the community setup (or: this site) was a little overwhelming. On the other hand I think it already is (very) wel structured, so I think we’ll get used to the setup by just using it.
A deep dive section would be appreciated by many, I think, although there probably is a broad variety of experiences and interests among the members. So I don’t think - for example - that every member will be interested in ‘how to create a visual first Daily Note workflow’ or ‘using ExcaliBrain as your Visual Map of all your notes’. (Of the last one I certainly am interested!)
That seems to be a common thread in all that I create . Something i need to continue to work on.
Is there anything specific you can point to that would have simplified the experience for you?
Is the left-side menu too long? If yes, what would you remove, merge, maybe hide behind a sub category?
One thought that crossed my mind was to create a short self-paced course: “Getting to know the SYM Community Site”. This would replace the current 15-minute welcome video, which is anyway too long. Of course, it would be even better if I could create an experience that does not need training, it is simply self-explanatory.
As far as I am (was) concerned I think the walkthrough in the first online session (recording) is very helpful!
I don’t think there are too many options on the left, it’s just (speaking for myself), that is takes time ‘to live’. Some items were still empty, until you started to add some items on the live session.
I agree with Bart - the recording from the online session was really useful for orientation. Perhaps you could do a shortened version of that as a “getting started” resource for new members. This could work well alongside semi-regular onboarding sessions for those who would like a guided introduction, and as a way for existing members to catch up on anything new. People will approach the site differently. Some will want to dive straight in and explore, while others will prefer to understand the structure first, so having a few options would help keep everyone (or most, anyway!) on board.
The structure is easy to follow, and the categories are well explained. Keeping things simple to start with is probably the right call, as it lowers the barrier to participation. Tags are tricky (for me anyway - I am easily overwhelmed with tags). This will become important as the content builds in terms of searching and browsing, so hopefully others have some good suggestions on tags.
On session topics, I wonder if “deep dives” as a label might unintentionally put people off suggesting topics if they feel their idea isn’t “deep” enough. I think you mentioned “workflows” at some point, and this feels more accessible and could invite a wider range of contributions. (Having said that, the topics suggested so far look fantastic!)
Thanks for all the work on the site! I am really looking forward to being a part of it.
I’m the same. Tags are a beast I’ve yet to tame. My concern is that if I don’t create some initial structure — or at least a naming convention with a bit of logic behind it — they could quickly get out of hand and lose their meaning.
I like the name “workflows.” I feel that if I can come up with a solid tag structure, tags could become breadcrumbs that weave workflows together.
The whole reason I started questioning whether “Tutorials” is the right name is that I suspect many of the topics already proposed won’t lead to simple tutorial videos of the “this is how you do X” kind. They’ll more likely become discussions around best practices, different approaches, and lessons learned.
That kind of knowledge is probably better shared as separate topics rather than buried in an endless stream of replies under one opening post.
I think this may become one of those exciting discoveries: figuring out the best way to organize our shared knowledge as we build this community together.
. Something i need to continue to work on.