[Bldg-sim] [Equest-users] Should onebuilding.org mailing lists transition to Discourse?

Chris Yates chris.malcolm.yates at gmail.com
Fri Dec 11 07:03:34 PST 2020 

Hi all

The "general purpose" nature of this group is very good. We've got
specialists in weather, M&V, and many of us are touching on other subjects
such as CFD, daylight and thermal bridging, or have interests in
Passivhaus. There are commercial users, academics and specialists. Software
users are represented from DOE2 through the full range of commercial
software. I definitely believe in the vast wealth of experience in this
group and in its continuing ability to inform - both one another and a new
generation of modelers. It would be easy to throw out the baby with the
bathwater, so let's deliberate on this as much as we need to and try to
gain a concensus.

I actually feel that the move to unmet hours has diluted this group. It
gave some benefits but it's divided our efforts. Perhaps any move should be
combined with efforts to re-consolidate our community and "woo back" those
separatists on unmet hours!

We could use google groups perhaps. In many ways, it gives similar
functionality to a list-server (you're so 90's Jason!). You get messages
relayed on email and you can answer on the forum or just by replying to
email. You can choose to receive all messages or a digest. Subscriber
emails are in the public domain. The search tools on the forum are google,
so you know they're good.

LBNL THERM has a group set up on there already:
https://groups.google.com/g/lbnl-therm

Ready to give a bit more of our souls to Larry and Sergey?

Chris

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 9:40 AM Karen Walkerman via Bldg-sim <
bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org> wrote:

> I think that Nick makes some really good points. Ease of use is a big
> barrier.
>
> Has anyone on here been using the Unmet Hours Slack?
>
> I leaned heavily on the Bldg-Sim email lists when I was beginning, and I
> spent a few years responding and contributing heavily responding to others
> as a way to give back.
>
> I have not been using any of the platforms very much in the last few years
> for a few reasons:
>
> 1. I am working entirely in EnergyPlus with a custom user-interface. Most
> questions both here and on Unmet-hours are about other software or
> platforms that I don't currently use.
>
> 2. These days, if I have an issue that I can't resolve on my own, by the
> time I've written about it clearly enough to post... I've either solved my
> issue or discovered a bug in the software. While writing down an issue and
> clearly communicating it is a good way to work through my process, it's
> quite lonely.
>
> As someone who's been working remotely from home for a long time, the
> thing I struggle the most with is a lack of community around work. What I
> would benefit from the most with this community would be a semi-regular
> spitball session with other experienced modelers. Maybe enter the brave new
> world of Zoom.
>
> If others are interested, I'd be happy to create a separate thread &
> organize a session.
>
> Be well,
>
> Karen
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 9:47 AM Nicholas Caton via Bldg-sim <
> bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org> wrote:
>
>> I was personally involved with that “wiki” effort, and I am glad you
>> reminded me Anthony.  “Lessons learned” with that experience may be helpful
>> to collect for Jason while considering options for this transition, if
>> anyone else has any memories from that experiment.
>>
>>
>>
>> I recall (years later, mind) that the wiki was not intended to *replace*,
>> but rather to *augment/supplement* the mailing lists.  The function of
>> the wiki was to create a better place to archive/publish specific sorts of
>> threads/content involving lots of imagery.  Icing on the cake would have
>> been the capability to allow for collaborative
>> contributions/editing/cross-linking/tagging, so that these articles/guides
>> could benefit from many perspectives and grow to become a more
>> useful/accessible archive of information over time.
>>
>>
>>
>> At that time, I was a little more active in generating step by step
>> guides (that I would later reference and re-send into the lists as topics
>> resurfaced) with lots of deliberate text formatting (color, indents,
>> bullets, etc.) & imagery to help others pick up on a procedure or
>> process/feature.  A shortcoming of the mailing list archives (then and now)
>> is that text formatting typically ends up totally stripped, and images
>> would be un-inserted and retained (if at all) as a series of cryptically
>> named attachments instead of in-line with the text, as originally
>> composed.  The wiki looked like a worthy experiment to circumvent that set
>> of archival issues, and better capture that sort of material for easier
>> access and retention.
>>
>>
>>
>> The wiki effort kinda fizzled in large part (I think) because a
>> wiki-based platform requires of the target audience/community: (1) a small
>> but meaningful increase in effort/time to access/search for information,
>> relative to the fully automated mailing list option that brings the content
>> to you, and (2) for contributors, a LOT more time/effort (relative to
>> emails) to contribute and deal with formatting/tagging/etc.  A minor
>> contributing factor may have also been “contributor fragmentation” as
>> around the same time period IBPSA was trying to launch a wiki effort with
>> similar goals (I do not recall exactly what extent these efforts overlapped
>> on a timeline).  Either initiative might have seen a lot more immediate
>> growth/success all the involved contributing parties were consolidated into
>> one effort.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think a wiki may remain an ideal format for something like the doe-2
>> reference/engineering manual, or similar large bodies of relatively static
>> work that could benefit from infrequent & disparate (but peer-reviewed)
>> edits/additions from time to time.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> As it stands, we can all recognize active contribution/participation on
>> the mailings lists remains a high hurdle for the community at large.  I
>> think the main hurdles preventing more active contribution from the
>> community include:
>>
>>    - Participation takes time/effort out of the day.  It’s hard for most
>>    with jobs including energy simulation to justify fitting something like
>>    emailing strangers a priority.  A new platform should place ease of
>>    accessibility (reading and contributions) as a penultimate priority.
>>    Access to read/contribute/search should ideally require a few clicks as
>>    possible.
>>    - Ego – I think a lot of engineers suffer a mental hurdle in asking
>>    questions or responding in a public forum.  It’s a tall order in some work
>>    environments/cultures to open up and admit “I don’t know something,”
>>    especially in a public forum where your admission ends up “on the record.”
>>    As a younger engineer especially I would get really hung up on this, until
>>    I figured out the people asking the most questions were often the smartest
>>    ones in the room.  A new platform *might* pick up a few more
>>    questions, especially from new and intermediate modelers, if it’s easy to
>>    submit queries in an anonymous fashion?
>>    - Propriety – It can be hard to ask a question sometimes (and
>>    especially attach a model) when the nature of the post/question can result
>>    in a clear line of identification to an active project, customer, or
>>    company.  The same concerns can make it difficult to share a working
>>    example/solution when you see someone ask for something at your
>>    fingertips.  We all want to be good stewards of potentially sensitive
>>    information.  It would be neat if a new platform could offer solutions to
>>    make it easier to ask questions anonymously, perhaps someday including
>>    scripts and/or guides to “anonymize” project files to make it easier to
>>    upload with confidence.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ~Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> *Nick Caton, P.E. (US), BEMP*
>>
>> *ニック* *ケートン**, P.E. (US), BEMP*
>>
>> Senior Energy Engineer
>> Energy Manager, Yokota Airbase
>>
>> ESS - Energy & Sustainability Services
>>
>> M JP
>> M US
>> Email
>>
>> +81 . 070 . 3366 . 3317
>>
>> +1   . 785 .  410  . 3317
>>
>> nicholas.caton at se.com
>>
>> シニアエネルギーエンジニア
>> 横田基地エネルギーマネージャー
>> ESS - エナジー持続可能性サービス
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Equest-users <equest-users-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org> *On
>> Behalf Of *Anthony Hardman via Equest-users
>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:58 AM
>> *To:* Jason Glazer <jglazer at gard.com>; bldg-sim at onebuilding.org;
>> equest-users at onebuilding.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] Should onebuilding.org mailing lists
>> transition to Discourse?
>>
>>
>>
>> [External email: Use caution with links and attachments]
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> I love the idea of transitioning to a more modern platform.  I like the
>> job board idea Nick mentioned.  Search & attachment functionality is a big
>> deal and I would also hope that the archives could get transferred, but
>> even if they can’t, I wouldn’t consider it a reason to stick with status
>> quo.  I’ve found the existing search functionality to be clunky at best as
>> I often can’t find threads that I know to exist, which has forced me to
>> save the ones I deem important directly to my own outlook (not ideal).
>>
>>
>>
>> I recall an energy simulation “wiki” idea gaining some traction years ago
>> which I think is less preferable than a modern forum.  If we’re comparing
>> resources, I think unmethours has the best platform and functionality from
>> a user perspective, followed by energy-models.com.
>>
>>
>>
>> Having said all that, I also love the community here and am tremendously
>> grateful for all the work and effort behind the onebuilding lists.
>>
>>
>>
>> Anthony Hardman, PE, BEAP, LEED AP BD+C
>>
>> Senior Building Performance Analyst, Owner
>>
>> The Green Engineer
>>
>> Sustainable Design Consulting
>>
>> 23 Bradford Street, 1st Floor, Concord, MA 01742
>>
>> Direct: 978.341.5459  |  Office: 978.369.8978
>>
>> E: anthony at greenengineer.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Jason Glazer [mailto:jglazer at gard.com <jglazer at gard.com>]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 3, 2020 11:45 AM
>> *To:* bldg-sim at onebuilding.org; equest-users at onebuilding.org
>> *Subject:* [Equest-users] Should onebuilding.org mailing lists
>> transition to Discourse?
>>
>>
>>
>> BLDG-SIM and eQUEST-users
>>
>> Sorry for the cross posting but this is a "meta" issue that I would like
>> feedback on.
>>
>> As you may know, I've been running the BLDG-SIM for over 20 years and
>> eQUEST-users for 12 years as well as other mailing lists on onebuilding.
>> org
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonebuilding.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7CNicholas.Caton%40se.com%7C3df4e8473f8144e9645c08d89c7470f7%7C6e51e1adc54b4b39b5980ffe9ae68fef%7C0%7C0%7C637431371211426155%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=T4LS7EghlkpHlzQIZacTxOKS3an3FRVL2ibk%2FHypSxE%3D&reserved=0>.
>> While the number of modelers has greatly increased over the years, the
>> community that participates in these mailing lists has not. I believe part
>> of that reason is that mailing lists are not very attractive to younger
>> modelers. I would like to revitalize the sense of community that I have
>> always seen in modelers by changing BLDG-SIM and eQUEST-users as well as
>> some of the other onebuilding.org mailing lists to a web and phone
>> enabled forum called Discourse:
>>
>> https://www.discourse.org/
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.discourse.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7CNicholas.Caton%40se.com%7C3df4e8473f8144e9645c08d89c7470f7%7C6e51e1adc54b4b39b5980ffe9ae68fef%7C0%7C0%7C637431371211426155%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=eiMEXNPcHIEFWOST5Fzb3col5j0A2CxNuAUEXJbMHEU%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> One nice thing about this type of forum is that for those used to a
>> mailing list, they can continue interacting just like a mailing list but
>> those more comfortable using a web-based or phone-based forum can
>> participate also.
>>
>> Example of the web/phone interface can be seen at:
>>
>>    https://meta.discourse.org/
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeta.discourse.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7CNicholas.Caton%40se.com%7C3df4e8473f8144e9645c08d89c7470f7%7C6e51e1adc54b4b39b5980ffe9ae68fef%7C0%7C0%7C637431371211436148%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=7pbHm1KOw5O465pweAkN98QvWLK0a7GCfp43cTau5Bw%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>    https://forum.golangbridge.org/
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum.golangbridge.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7CNicholas.Caton%40se.com%7C3df4e8473f8144e9645c08d89c7470f7%7C6e51e1adc54b4b39b5980ffe9ae68fef%7C0%7C0%7C637431371211436148%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=oPNcP%2BRB65FIY19V8hpOzyr33Ng%2BEC%2FG%2BHHD8j8%2FRhA%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>    https://discourse.julialang.org/
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdiscourse.julialang.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7CNicholas.Caton%40se.com%7C3df4e8473f8144e9645c08d89c7470f7%7C6e51e1adc54b4b39b5980ffe9ae68fef%7C0%7C0%7C637431371211446143%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=YTWwiGZysUYJizTKdjnnN4i3L%2FcBZWZ0Jv70Ro2HP3E%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>    https://discuss.atom.io/
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdiscuss.atom.io%2F&data=04%7C01%7CNicholas.Caton%40se.com%7C3df4e8473f8144e9645c08d89c7470f7%7C6e51e1adc54b4b39b5980ffe9ae68fef%7C0%7C0%7C637431371211456139%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=R4FsgIGG57S5wNLE177bZgxTfk%2Fh8ItQb1yi1RzTbjk%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> I'm thinking it would be a single Discourse forum but with categories
>> that correspond to the existing mailing lists and perhaps some other
>> categories. It would probably live at:
>>
>>     forum.onebuilding.org
>>
>> or something like that.
>>
>> The reason I'm bringing this up today is that I also help manage the
>> energyplus_support list hosted on Yahoo and on December 15, Yahoo is going
>> to shut down all of its mailing lists and one of the transition options
>> would be the same Discourse forum.
>>
>> I know that unmethours.com has become a valuable resource to the
>> community for questions and answers but I believe that a forum for
>> discussion and announcements will continue to be important. Announcements
>> for jobs, training, events, etc.. as well as discussion that does not fit
>> in the question and answer format continue to occur.
>>
>> Please let me know what you think and if you think that BLDG-SIM and
>> eQUEST-users as well as the other public mailing lists on onebuilding.org
>> should transition to a Discourse forum.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Jason Glazer, P.E., BEMP, GARD Analytics, 90.1 ECB chair
>>
>> Admin for onebuilding.org building performance mailing lists
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bldg-sim mailing list
>> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
>> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20201211/468d0ddb/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list