Future Web Development - Appearance & Visual Style

Where do you see that it has already been fixed? I see the text has been changed to say that you need 51% of all minting coins, but it still says that you also need 51% of the mining power. Did Chronos write this or someone else?

Where do you see that it has already been fixed? I see the text has been changed to say that you need 51% of all minting coins, but it still says that you also need 51% of the mining power. Did Chronos write this or someone else?[/quote]
I c/p-ed the content from the pull request that Chronos made here: Rewrite of minting explanation for clarity and quality by ChronosCrypto · Pull Request #32 · super3/peercoin.net · GitHub

Here is the HTML version, so you can edit it more easily: http://peercoinpulls.bearbin.net/147/minting

Yep, my content was incorrect. Change this:

In a hybrid proof-of-work/proof-of-stake system, an attacker must possess 51% of mining power and 51% of all minting Peercoins, which makes any attack much more difficult. This is also a natural deterrent, since an attack would cause the value of the currency to drop. A party that possesses a majority of the coins is naturally motivated to not crash their value in an attack.

into this:

In Peercoin's proof-of-stake system, an attacker must possess 51% of all minting coins, which makes any attack much more difficult. This is also a natural deterrent, since an attack would cause the value of the currency to drop. A party that possesses a large number of the coins is naturally motivated to not crash their value in an attack.

In your pull request, Super3 responded with this…

Took a look. I argue that most people are not going to take the time to read those large blocks of texts. Need to commission a more graphical approach.

There are added graphics in the version TheWildHorse has made, but does anyone feel this is enough, or do we need more to visually tell the story? There is a lot of text there. I’m thinking that Chronos could film a YouTube video explaining much of what’s on this page and we could place it to the right of the introduction text. This way we have text, images and video all on one page. Each one will appeal more to somebody, so it’s a good idea that we cover all three.

I still need to read the entire thing, but does it talk about the fact that the entire network can be run on low-grade hardware, allowing any device to be able to participate and mint equally? I think this is very important to talk about. The animated video included a section about this, showing all the different types of devices that could be used for minting, phones, old computers, etc… If it’s not already in there, we should have a section after “Efficiency” called “Equal Participation,” where it explains the unfairness of proof of work mining and the fairness of proof of stake minting, due to the fact that anyone can mint using low-powered devices. Then we should have a graphic next to it showing all the various devices that can be used for Peercoin minting.

I’m open to this idea, but if we produce a video for the minting page, it may make sense to do small videos for many other pages, as well. It should also be noted that a lot of the info on this page is already in the giant Intro to Peercoin video, though that’s not necessarily a bad thing, since a 3-minute, single-topic video is much easier to digest for newcomers.

I’m not sure if this would be a marketing fund proposal, or if it would come out of the budget for the website.

Thoughts?

This was my thinking. Each important page could have a separate video, explaining the content of the page in video format. For example, the video for this page would explain what minting is and the benefits, pretty much everything already laid out in the text on the page. Then when they click on the quick start guide at the bottom of the page, they’d be taken to a page detailing “How” to get started minting. This would include text, images and a video walkthough, all 3 major forms of communication. Then another page could focus on mining, etc…

The main 38 minute video that you created could be featured on the general info page. If you take a look back at the home page designs, there are many links that all go to the general info Peercoin page, the link under the logos, in the navigation and all the “Learn More” buttons under the three features.

[quote=“Chronos, post:141, topic:2499”]I’m not sure if this would be a marketing fund proposal, or if it would come out of the budget for the website.

Thoughts?[/quote]

I’m thinking we should use the marketing fund, since we might want to keep the website funds for the designer. The videos could be used other places besides just the website, so it should fall under marketing. What do others think?

It sounds like what the community really needs for this project is for someone to take the lead on content creation. TheWildHorse is doing a great job on the design, because that’s his strength: design. Here are his thoughts on content, from earlier in this thread:

What do you guys think of taking one of these routes?

[ul][li]Option 1: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to take a lead role on content creation, working directly with TheWildHorse. In this role, I would edit and/or create written content, as needed, for every page of the new site. In addition to the written content, I would create short instructional videos for certain pages, such as the minting page.[/li]
[li]Option 2: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to product short instructional videos for a small handful of pages, and leave general content creation to the community, as it has been.[/li][/ul]

Either of the options are reasonably intense projects, so I want to get the community feedback before I put the effort into scoping out their exact size and cost. The first option would have the potential to really speed up the development process, since TheWildHorse wouldn’t have to wait for community content on each page.

Open to your thoughts.

;D :pbjt: ;D

This is what I’ve been waiting for. As soon as I get home from work I’ll write up a response to this.

It sounds like what the community really needs for this project is for someone to take the lead on content creation. TheWildHorse is doing a great job on the design, because that’s his strength: design. Here are his thoughts on content, from earlier in this thread:

What do you guys think of taking one of these routes?

[ul][li]Option 1: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to take a lead role on content creation, working directly with TheWildHorse. In this role, I would edit and/or create written content, as needed, for every page of the new site. In addition to the written content, I would create short instructional videos for certain pages, such as the minting page.[/li]
[li]Option 2: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to product short instructional videos for a small handful of pages, and leave general content creation to the community, as it has been.[/li][/ul]

Either of the options are reasonably intense projects, so I want to get the community feedback before I put the effort into scoping out their exact size and cost. The first option would have the potential to really speed up the development process, since TheWildHorse wouldn’t have to wait for community content on each page.

Open to your thoughts.[/quote]

Chronos, I was actually going to offer you PPC to head this project up tonight, but you beat me to it. I think it has become painfully obvious that this is a huge undertaking and it isn’t going to get done quickly with only volunteers. I’ve already tried for the last several weeks to motivate people to help with content creation to no avail. We’ve received some help, but not what I was expecting. What we need is somebody to take the lead on content creation as you said, so we can move this website redesign along at a faster pace.

I choose a mixture of option 1 and 2. I want you to take the lead on content creation for the website, but you’ll need to understand that the community has the final say. What I mean is that you would work with TheWildHorse to plan out the different pages that need to be created. Once there is a set plan for each page, you would write the content. The community would then have a chance to comment on your work or offer suggestions for improvement. When the written content has been finalized, TheWildHorse would make up some visual imagery to go along with it as he has done for the minting page. You could also create videos as needed, but only once the community has approved the written content and it has been finalized (This is so any changes or improvements in the written content will also be in the video). All discussion and work would need to be done publicly and not through PM: 1. So everything is transparent. 2. So the community can give feedback on ideas from the two of you at any time.

I feel that the participation of the community with this project will increase once somebody is creating the bulk of the content. A lot of people seem to be better at offering suggestions and feedback, rather than creating content like this from scratch, so once you start posting things for review, I think you can expect people to participate a lot more.

There is one problem I see. The marketing fund proposal process will take some time and we would need you to start on this immediately. Maybe this can work as a solution. I can lend you 100 PPC to get started with TheWildHorse on this right now. At the same time you can post your proposal in the marketing fund board. Because you’ve already been paid some PPC, you can start working while you’re waiting for the proposal to be approved. Once the proposal gets approved, the marketing fund would need to pay me back the 100 PPC, plus the amount to you that you’re asking to take on this role. You would need to mention in the proposal that I lent you the money to get started immediately and that I would need to be paid back once approved. If for some reason the proposal didn’t get approved, you could keep my 100 PPC and then stop working on the project once you felt like you had done 100 PPC worth of work. Is that something that could work for you?

I like what I am reading, this would really speed up the process.

As far as the minting page goes, while I do agree that there is too much text to keep the average reader occupied, there is no such thing as too much and too detailed content. If someone wants to learn exactly what minting is, that text covers it pretty well.

That being said, I agree that we should make a shorter explanation. But one way to do that would be creating a section in the “type of user” page about minting. That page would just explain the basics of minting, and the 1% reward thing, not going into detail on how it works, closing all that into a magical black box, and giving the regular user only the information that he has to know to start minting, nothing more. If he wants to learn more on his own, he can do that by visiting the minting page and reading all about PoS and so on.

Yes, this makes sense.

This is a great option, Chronos. You’ve shown that you have a strong background to take the lead on this, so I’ll definitely provide my support (in a vote for your proposal, and additional PPC to the marketing fund).

Sentinelrv’s 100 PPC idea is reasonable, but I would like to clarify objectives. I outlined two options:

[quote=“Chronos, post:143, topic:2499”][ul][li]Option 1: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to take a lead role on content creation, working directly with TheWildHorse. In this role, I would edit and/or create written content, as needed, for every page of the new site. In addition to the written content, I would create short instructional videos for certain pages, such as the minting page.[/li]
[li]Option 2: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to product short instructional videos for a small handful of pages, and leave general content creation to the community, as it has been.[/li][/ul][/quote]

The main difference between these proposals is the “leadership” role. In Option 2, I create video content as needed, and the proposal is considered completed when the videos are launched. Here, I would not take a lead role in the website construction, nor would I be responsible for ensuring a finished website.

With Option 1, however, I would take a leadership role for the website, responsible for its completion. This option would be significantly more work.

To help clarify, consider the difference between the production process for the OKC promotional video, and the Chronos Crypto Intro to Peercoin video. The former was developed over a long period of time, while the latter was produced quickly. Now, Overkillcoin did a great job, and the delays were simply a reflection of the “design by committee” that the OKC video went through. Please see http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/06/29/why-design-by-commitee-should-die/, or search the internet for other articles.

I believe that design-by-committee could be the reason that this website project has struggled, and am concerned that a mixture of the two options is not the best approach.

[quote=“Chronos, post:149, topic:2499”]Sentinelrv’s 100 PPC idea is reasonable, but I would like to clarify objectives. I outlined two options:

[quote=“Chronos, post:143, topic:2499”][ul][li]Option 1: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to take a lead role on content creation, working directly with TheWildHorse. In this role, I would edit and/or create written content, as needed, for every page of the new site. In addition to the written content, I would create short instructional videos for certain pages, such as the minting page.[/li]
[li]Option 2: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to product short instructional videos for a small handful of pages, and leave general content creation to the community, as it has been.[/li][/ul][/quote]

The main difference between these proposals is the “leadership” role. In Option 2, I create video content as needed, and the proposal is considered completed when the videos are launched. Here, I would not take a lead role in the website construction, nor would I be responsible for ensuring a finished website.

With Option 1, however, I would take a leadership role for the website, responsible for its completion. This option would be significantly more work.

To help clarify, consider the difference between the production process for the OKC promotional video, and the Chronos Crypto Intro to Peercoin video. The former was developed over a long period of time, while the latter was produced quickly. Now, Overkillcoin did a great job, and the delays were simply a reflection of the “design by committee” that the OKC video went through. Please see http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/06/29/why-design-by-commitee-should-die/, or search the internet for other articles.

I believe that design-by-committee could be the reason that this website project has struggled, and am concerned that a mixture of the two options is not the best approach.[/quote]

I read the article you linked. This quote…

“And when too many people have product input, you’ve got lots of features but no soul.”

…reminded me of NXT. Lots of features, but no guiding vision. That is what makes Peercoin different. Sunny King will listen to feedback, ideas and suggestions, but he ultimately has the final say as the creator and architect. His guiding vision overrules everyone else.

With the OKC video, the problems seemed to come when people would second guess him. For example, when ppcman started to have second thoughts about the voice work. The community took care of the script, because that’s what we were good at and the designer took care of the animation, because that’s what he was good at. I think we provided him with a lot of room to move when it came to his animation ideas. We felt confident in his decisions. Nobody really second guessed him that much in that area, so maybe that’s why the end product came out so good. Everyone was allowed to do what they do best. The feedback process just seemed to slow everything down.

What you’re talking about here makes sense to me. So you want to be able to do your work here without the process being drug out over a long time span. You would need to have the final say on content in order for this to work, right? I think I might be able to go along with that only because you’ve already proven yourself with the Intro to Peercoin video. My only concern is how much say the community will have. I’d still like everything to be done publicly, so anyone can give you feedback on your work or suggest possible improvements. You would need to have the final say though, so things keep moving along.

What do you and others think?

As I already stated, this would be perfect, and it would speed up the project right along.

Thumbs up from me Chrono!

Here is the proposal Chronos made to the marketing fund…

http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=3160.0

I’m working on content unrelated stuff in the meantime, I’m converting the volunpeer form to the site now.

Anyways, I’m off for a couple of hours now, have to do some paperwork for college.

Are you going to need any kind of info from our Google form in order to make it work?

Are you going to need any kind of info from our Google form in order to make it work?[/quote]
I got everything I need, I would like to get viewing access so I can test it tho, if that is possible…

[quote=“Chronos, post:143, topic:2499”][ul][li]Option 1: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to take a lead role on content creation, working directly with TheWildHorse. In this role, I would edit and/or create written content, as needed, for every page of the new site. In addition to the written content, I would create short instructional videos for certain pages, such as the minting page.[/li]
[li]Option 2: I put out a Marketing Fund bid to product short instructional videos for a small handful of pages, and leave general content creation to the community, as it has been.[/li][/ul][/quote]

I am excited about Chronos’ proposals. I prefer Option 1

I don’t see any conflict between Chronos taking a lead role on content and the Community having an input. Chronos is merely asking for permission to get on with the job

Once Chronos has finshed each page, it can be presented for Community comment and review. Chronos can then make necessary amendments

If there is particular content (or its omission) that is controversial, we can resolve it by a debate and vote