Fri 25 Feb 2022 10:00PM

(Closed) Change the website

K Kris Public Seen by 42

# Proposer

## Proposer (name, handle, etc.):


## Proposer’s role:

I do things. Lately I had to use the website to sell tickets.

# The advice process

## Information gathered before posting

I've bothered most people involved with this site about this now. I've also spent a lot of time making websites.

## People/roles most affected by this proposal

- People who aren't integrated that well into Kiez Burn

- People looking for directions to site

## People/roles with the most knowledge and experience relevant to this proposal:

@Erin @Veroca R. Sala


# The proposal

## Background

The website was down for weeks. It's very slow.

The website is build on technology so old that it can vote. There are spiders everywhere.

It contains information that's not up to date, and that cannot be changed by stakeholders (e.g. list of kieze).

The design is not uniform (e.g. the space between paragraphs in the "2019 financial report" is so big it's unclear whether it's an image not loading or not - also there are no finances on that page)

It also fails to conform to a lot of web accessibility guidelines. It scores poorly on Google's mobile checking thing.

## The proposal

* Move the website from a "LAMP stack" to "JAM stack"

* Utilize modern tools like Hugo to make a performant site

* Move most of the information over to community platforms where more people can edit.

* Basically everything that changes from year to year would be good to move out so realizers don't have to grapple with access.

* Put the design and everything else in a public Git repository

* Preferably one with a nice web-based edit interface so non-technical people can easily change things

## How would the proposal be implemented

By copying the design and contents over to a new platform, and making adjustments.

## Who would implement this proposal

I can do it if nobody else want's to.

## When would this proposal be implemented

Next weekend?

## What would be the cost (time, money, effort, etc.) of this proposal

I have no idea what we pay for this, but I imagine there's some savings to be made.

## What are the advantages of this proposal (relative to the current situation and/or counter-proposals)

Make things more accessible.

## What are the disadvantages of this proposal (relative to the current situation and/or counter-proposals)

It's hard work.

# Decision

Doin' it! It's on the roadmap, probably for next cycle (post KB).


Caro T Sat 26 Feb 2022 4:36PM

Personally, I would support this idea and help you execute it as we had enough technical issues with the current website. Vital would be to close down the existing address though (so as not to confuse people googling Kiez Burn and ending up on the wrong page) and securing all current data.


Alex Kaos Sat 26 Feb 2022 5:47PM

I am in full support of technical development in all areas.

I am also in support of the realizers that spent a long time making the current website. So long as they are comfortable with the move then I am in full support. Let me know if I can help with anything.


Veroca R. Sala Tue 1 Mar 2022 8:23AM

Hi, I have participated in creating the current website with Erin in the past, and I am personally in favor of improving it or making the te technical changes needed.

The goal of the current website

  • The main goal we had with Erin was to create a website as a big and simple FAQ. Basically We only needed to update the links to Talk, tickets info page, and financial reports.

  • The website wasn't meant to provide guidelines about realizers roles, nor make open calls/ recruitment, no news, but just direct people into the right clicks (given the fact we have so many platforms).

  • the user persona Erin had targeted was basically newcomers (based on all random and basic questions people would ask facebook along the years she was facebook admin and comms lead).

My request

Id personally like it if we kept the content FAQ and the general architecture of the site (when possible!) just because is something that we have given thought to, to make it useful and easy to navigate.

My concern

  • IMO letting everybody add content will just transform the website into a shit show, where some people will put information that is probably not needed (or confusing) while some info will still be missing. Then the website as initially was created, would make no sense anymore.

  • In the past, (in my experience at least) Realizers are either very keen to add "everything" on the website, or they just dont care at all. The end result could be a very nice but useless patchwork website. Im more of the idea of having someone to be responsible for its updates. Erin and I were on it in 2021 but we didn't sign up for 2022 =/


Despite my concern, im not to stand in your way, if you would like to experiment with it, just go ahead this is what is about, and I think it is how it should be, we put in some work, and then we put our hearts somewhere else leaving things behind that can be transformed or re-created by others. Im not personally attached to the website, I just think it would work fine as it is if we had someone updating the content and links, and someone keeping up with the technical part ( the website has been abandoned), but yeah! im happy people are keen to experiment! and thank you for sticking around and bringing up fresh ideas ❤️

note:Im not sure what Erin thinks, maybe you can try to reach out privately as she is not so much on Talk.


Kris Thu 7 Apr 2022 3:27AM

No hearing any big disagreements here, so I've plopped this onto the Robotic Roadmap. Technically I'm keen to experiment with Outline as the editor (see that other AP, which should address questions about access), but we'll see how far that stretches. Will probably do some proof of concept things first, and then get back to it.


Erin Jeavons-Fellows Thu 7 Apr 2022 5:10PM

Hi guys, sorry I only just saw this!
Im in support of updating the website.
As vero said, we put quite alot of thinking into what should go on the website. As comms lead, Kieze lead and FB admin for the last years, we made the website as the first point of call and the source to find all the information needed to get to Kiez Burn. Things get really lost in the fb and on talk. The website was designed to become another channel to help direct people to the information they needed.
It would be my strong preference that the FAQ isn't changed. I know from being part of comms and kieze in previous years the FAQ works well. I know this because of the feedback that was given from Kieze and participants.
List of Kieze gets updated by the Kieze facilitator when kieze register - this is already managed and Sadie is updating and managing it.
As for the rest of the FAQ content, as far as I know it is up to date but maybe missing a few links as these talk threads have not been created yet, so they link to the 2021 threads for now and Marie is managing those updates.
So I personally think content wise, its in a good place. I feel surprise that the tech is "old", Ale updated all this last year and as far as I know the theme is up to date.
The design on the reports are not uniform, thats right. I didnt put any work into prettying those pages because no one really looks at them and they come from old content. The rest of the site was really designed last year, so I will feel disappointed to hear that we're talking about redoing it (AGAIN!). There's really been a long story of 3 years of work to get that site live last year.

I've attached the brief that we wrote last year which provides context and reasoning as to how we got to where it is now.

I would really suggest people look and read through this document and stick to the target audience of the website before we go making content changes. Alot of this was really thought through. As someone whose key role was delivering content and managing comms to people for the last 3 years, I feel the current content is really relevant and doesn't need to be changed or redone.

I also disagree with people just adding content. we had this before and it was a mess. That is why now we have a specific web admin and so far that person is on it and updated accordingly. Please please please, dont go back here. it took 3 years of redoing this site and to go back again so quick, with no proper or informed reason, would be devastating. I speak from experience!

in summary if its just "copying the design and contents over to a new platform, and making adjustments" to make it faster then cool. I think its important to have a WYSIWYG in the back so that people who are not so technical can easily update the site.

@Kris @Cris @Veroca R. Sala @Kaliope


Kris Sat 26 Feb 2022 8:21PM

I can't tag Erin on here, anyone else I should bother?


Erin Jeavons-Fellows Thu 7 Apr 2022 6:50PM

Sorry for the delay. I didn't manage to get any info about this and it seems any opportunity to contact me didn't work. Kate contacted me on discord just now so that was the only channel that went through <3 <3


Kris Sat 26 Feb 2022 8:22PM

We'd keep the old address, and set up redirects for any moved pages.


Kaliope Thu 7 Apr 2022 11:39AM

@Erin Jeavons-Fellows maybe still wants to give some input here?


Erin Jeavons-Fellows Thu 7 Apr 2022 5:17PM



Kris Thu 7 Apr 2022 6:19PM

I'm a bit sad at this comment because I doesn't seem that I've adequately communicated the problems I see, nor what the proposed solution is. There's a lot of worry here that feels unfounded, and I wish you'd come with it earlier so I could have addressed it.

I am however not going to lend much credence to sunk cost, we regularly set things on fire.

I do have a few issues with how information is organized which is mostly small things I don't think we'd have many differences on (way too deep nesting some places for instance). My main gripes are the atrocious load times (10 seconds to render complete on some pages), and maintainability. That's both in the content space with all the dead links, and on the backend where nobody bothers to update the certificates for months leaving the site unusable. Somebody could spend weeks fixing all that on the existing site, but that's not fun and I wouldn't want to ask anyone to do it.

Thanks for the proposal, that's some interesting and useful stuff I hadn't seen before. Some of it is very good and I'd like to see expressed much more clearly.

Ultimately this doesn't change my mind, the project goes on the board with a higher priority than fixes, and then we see where that leads.