Okay, I spend (waste) a lot of time looking at various CAP web pages and for the most part our wings do a halfway decent job of keeping their web page filled with current news (except for those wings who have made a valid choice to have a more static web page).
But, I continue to be surprised at California. As one of the top 3 states in terms of CAP membership and one at the center of the US tech industry, you would think it could do a better web site.
So, I can live with a bad layout, but I just get irked when you look in the "News" section and find really old material. It just makes the unit look horrible -- like you haven't done anything of use in long time.
So, while CA has a current calender (about the only thing that seems to get updated regularly), its news section is ancient.
The most recent news story on the CA site is dated January 4, 2006 -- thats almost 2.5 years old!
And this is from a Wing which has a 4 person public affairs staff according to the web site! Most Wings barely have 1 person.
Is there another Wing out there more pitiful and with older news stories being featured in their News section?
^2.5 years, but still..Ouch.
http://gp7.cawg.cap.gov/
See the notice on my groups website? (Gp 7, CAWG)
That's been there since '07. Before that, we didn't even have a group site.
I've been contemplating talking to my group commander about the position of group webmaster, seeing as how he knows I've designed and am maintaining my new squadron's site.
I didn't see anything in the CAP Internet Ops Regulation against a Cadet holding the postion, but... Would anyone have any further info as to whether that'd be allowed?
"You find it, you fix it" - Lt Col "Uncle Vern" Nordman
Just recently the CAWG PA Director asked all of the PAOs in the Wing to send him info for the news so he can update that site. The former Wing PAO guy let that and a number of other things get unravelled. He was a great hindrance to the PA program. But, he was very impressed with himself.
Glad to hear that this may be on the way to being fixed. I think the larger Wings have somewhat more of an obligation to be doing things right since they should also have the capability to do so. I probably wouldn't rag too hard on Vermont, Montana, or the other tiny (in terms of CAP membership) Wings.
Turning this into a positive story... which wing have you found to have the best and most updated site?
http://www.indiana-wing.org/www/index.php There's mine.
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 28, 2008, 05:00:23 AM
Turning this into a positive story... which wing have you found to have the best and most updated site?
Thats off topic, sorry. >:D
Ohio rarely updates its main page, but the Wing/CC is good about keeping us informed via Wing email. It would still be nice to be able to re-read it on the Wing page if necessary. That's why I keep track of every email I send and receive. It surprises me about California, but if you have other issues to deal with, a website isn't the most important.
Well, my point sort of was that CA is large enough (over 3,000 members) that they don't have any excuse for not dealing with this issue. A small wing can't do it all, but California should be doing it all and if they aren't, something important ain't working. Its not a critical issue, but I believe it is an important one.
CAWG has the same personnel issues that every other wing has. In addition, we do at least one mission that most other wings don't do (CD), and that takes away from other areas sometimes. And just because we have 3000 members, it doesn't mean that we have a bigger pool of people interested in and willing to do the staff jobs.
Sure, the percentage of willing workers is probably the same as other places, but if you've got 10% interested in doing staff work in a 500 person Wing you've got 50 people. In California, that is 300 -- so the absolute number of people willing to do work (for the same number of staff positions) is a lot higher.
Quote from: SarDragon on June 28, 2008, 10:13:04 PM
CAWG has the same personnel issues that every other wing has. In addition, we do at least one mission that most other wings don't do (CD), and that takes away from other areas sometimes. And just because we have 3000 members, it doesn't mean that we have a bigger pool of people interested in and willing to do the staff jobs.
CD is huge here and we have a pretty good PAO. We only have 1000 people total. About 300 of those are cadets.
One possibility for why some of the larger Wings are "weaker" in some areas is that they often have a tremendous amount of talent sucked up by the Group command structure. I bet there are a couple of good Group PAOs and webmasters out there in CA who would make a fine Wing staff member if they didn't have the option of working at a smaller scale.
^I completely agree. There are some things that need to be done at a group level, but not everything. I am a fan of one wing website hosting all the information. Take the six different website admins in PAWG and let them all help on the wing one and make it outstanding with little shoot offs for group specific announcements.
Quote from: Tubacap on June 28, 2008, 11:49:06 PM
^I completely agree. There are some things that need to be done at a group level, but not everything. I am a fan of one wing website hosting all the information. Take the six different website admins in PAWG and let them all help on the wing one and make it outstanding with little shoot offs for group specific announcements.
Yes.
PAWG doesn't maintain a comprehensive news section because we simply don't have the people to do it. I add important announcements that the Wing CC asks for, but I don't have time to update the news several times a week. Another problem is actually GETTING news items from the units, which was the trouble when I actually tried to make a news section.
There is a lot of talent in PAWG, but it's hard to find the right people. I've asked around a lot, but most of the people I come up with are hardware/network admin people and don't know anything about web sites. Taking the approach of using PAOs, we're seriously short on those too.
QuotePAWG doesn't maintain a comprehensive news section because we simply don't have the people to do it. I add important announcements that the Wing CC asks for, but I don't have time to update the news several times a week.
I think that is a valid approach. Obviously a web site with a lot of current news on it is preferable, but isn't necessary. What gets me steamed is web sites with "News" in the "News" section that is ancient history. The best move in that situation is to just take that section out until such time as you've got someone that can keep it up to date.
Quote from: JC004 on June 29, 2008, 01:19:30 AM
I add important announcements that the Wing CC asks for, but I don't have time to update the news several times a week.
For that action alone, they should have promoted you to CAPTAIN! Here is some ancient news you can post on the PAWG Website............."where the crap is COLGANS AFIADL 13 test???"
Colgan......PAWGS site is awesome, you put in many hours of hard work, much more work than many new CAP members that come into the organization as a CAPTAIN because of advanced degrees, or FLY. Be happy knowing you have done more in the past year for CAP, than they will do the entire time they are in CAP.
BTW.....I hear you are looking for someone to update the news section on the website. I suggest you just shut the entire site down until they deliver the AFIADL test to you. A big middle finger pic would suffice.
PAWG's site has far to go. There is a lot we can do, an unfortunately I can't bring the entire capability of what I do for clients, since I pay people for the work. The site will be upgrading soon with any luck, though.
To address the issue of talent again from a webmaster's prospective, the people are hard to find, busy, or uninterested in working at the wing level. Some perceive wing as a place where old CAP members go to die, or they are offended by wing not always meeting their expectations - say not having an ES rating processed or whatever. I can certainly sympathize with this now. There is also the difficulty of getting information that I mentioned. I hardly have time to do the updates I need to make, or develop some cool stuff I'm working on - I can't possibly write all the news items too.
RiverAux is right - there is a lot of potential. I see the difficulty, at least in PAWG, as the above issues. Another avenue, although not specifically for your news sections, is to have webmasters from different wings work together on projects. I'd be interested in seeing something like that, like for building intranet applications that can be used at the wing level.
Again, how many of you have got off your kiester to write stories for your webpages and pubic affairs houses?
I think we already have a tread knocking public affairs...enough already!!!
Actually, I think we're knocking CAP webmasters primarily here. Its their responsibility to either get new news from their PAO and put it on the website or at a minimum, remove ancient news releases from it.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 29, 2008, 04:30:19 PM
Actually, I think we're knocking CAP webmasters primarily here. Its their responsibility to either get new news from their PAO and put it on the website or at a minimum, remove ancient news releases from it.
Why not send the webmaster an e-mail or contact the SQUADRN, GROUP or WING command and have it changed in a more intergrity minded way instead of in this less than so manner?
What? Because some think that someone changed the wording of an article online that this is an accepted practice. That seems to be me to be the less than simple and direct way to effect change here.
People make errors, it is more important for those errors to be corrected in a manner in keeping with civility than to "roast" someone's work online.
If y'all want to be "self-appointed" mavens/guardians of good public affairs work, why not correct it in a manner more becoming of a CAP Officer instead of the Statler and Waldorf method displayed here?
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/MandyMae/statler_and_waldorf.jpg)
This is not a simple error (which I do report to webmasters all the time).
A webmaster that has let old information like this sit on their web page for 2.5 years already knows they've got old stuff on thier site and telling them that this is the case is unlikely to make a difference. People doing their job in a less than satisfactory (which is the case according to me) manner don't like to be told that this is the case by someone outside their chain of command.
I know you've been around CAP a long time and how well do you think a Wing Commander is going to respond to being told that their guy is doing a bad job by somone from another Wing? Do you think that is going to really accomplish anything especially when the issue at hand relates to a personal opinion on web page/public affairs management than something direct like a violation of a regulation?
No, we bring subjects like this up on the board to highlight issues that affect CAP as a whole. The situation with CA's web page and their news sections is just the most prominent example that I know about.
The obvious solution is to have better direction on this included in appropriate CAP training programs.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 29, 2008, 05:35:23 PM
The obvious solution is to have better direction on this included in appropriate CAP training programs.
I agree with this, but I don't see how creating "Hey, let's point and laugh" threads basically in the style of the "Funny Uniform" threads helps in the proper way.
Guidance requires a degree of accountability, and I believe that if a WING Commander was getting input (privately) from persons outside the WING (done with tact and civility) that steps would be taken to insure that PAOs, especially WING level Public Affairs, would improve.
This is all a form of "praise in public, condemn in private." Sure, it lacks the theatrical explosion of an ON LINE FLAME, but it returns better more ethical dividends!!!
I have never yet seen a problem get fixed unless it is first demonstrated that there is a problem. You always need to point to examples to show what you're talking about. Heck, half the time when a topic is brought up for discussion here someone complains that no one has shown that there is a problem that needs to be fixed in the first place.
QuoteGuidance requires a degree of accountability, and I believe that if a WING Commander was getting input (privately) from persons outside the WING (done with tact and civility) that steps would be taken to insure that PAOs, especially WING level Public Affairs, would improve.
Unfortunately, I think that is a pretty naive view of how CAP (or any organization) works. I'm about 95% positive that the immediate response to such an email would be (at the very minimum) the receipt of a very angry call from your Wing commander that you should mind your own **** business.
Incidentally, while I agree that criticizing photos of random CAP members on this page isn't necessary (anyone who knows the uniform regs doesn't have to look far to find someone in violation, so specific examples aren't necessary). However, it is entirely legit to criticize photos of bad uniforms in the Volunteer or CAP News Online. Those are national publications that have an obligation to be doing things right. From what I understand, historically they were very strict on those issues and it was almost impossible to sneak a violation past them. Now, I'm not so sure. But, as the visible face of CAP they have to take their chances.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 29, 2008, 06:43:37 PM
I have never yet seen a problem get fixed unless it is first demonstrated that there is a problem. You always need to point to examples to show what you're talking about. Heck, half the time when a topic is brought up for discussion here someone complains that no one has shown that there is a problem that needs to be fixed in the first place.
My dear Sir, you began this as a "witchunt" asking CAP Officers to go about the web and point out the worst and post in here where it would be snickered at from the "balcony." I too, believe in pointing out the problem; however, I believe more in pointing them out to the people who stand in a position to solve that problem.
QuoteUnfortunately, I think that is a pretty naive view of how CAP (or any organization) works.
What is unfortunate is that you see my idealism, the idea of running CAP "as it should," as flawed in favor of giving into to certain elements of the status quo. Unlike you, I do not believe in accepting the failings of organizations as the ONLY REALITY...I instead want those failigs addressed.
One failing I see with CAPTALK is its ability to present problems with no recourse for solution. That makes us "Statler and Waldorf." Always the critic, never on the stage.
Well, in my opinion contacting he webmaster and unit command of the offending site is more a solution than lambasting it on a form like this.
QuoteUnlike you, I do not believe in accepting the failings of organizations as the ONLY REALITY...I instead want those failigs addressed.
And the only effective way to fix a situation like this is to address it here. If you want to try to attempt to unclog the stovepipe that CAP prefers all communications follow, you're welcome to it.
But, I think we've taken this as far as it is likely to go...
Quote from: RiverAux on June 29, 2008, 09:10:39 PM
QuoteUnlike you, I do not believe in accepting the failings of organizations as the ONLY REALITY...I instead want those failigs addressed.
And the only effective way to fix a situation like this is to address it here. If you want to try to attempt to unclog the stovepipe that CAP prefers all communications follow, you're welcome to it.
But, I think we've taken this as far as it is likely to go...
Yes, my friend, I think we have reached the end on this matter. Let's work together in the same direction...though it be on two different paths.
Can this be helped by having one website template for all units in CAP that is managed by NHQ and where all other units are subordinates?
This has worked on Wing/Group levels with squadrons as "tabs" or "sections" on the main website. Could it work on a larger scale?
I mean if we create an easy to update templated website for each unit that works within the cap.gov domain and release clear instructions on how to update information in such website and the limit of information that can be stored by each unit, wouldn't it make it possible for most units to keep up with the flow?
Right now, most units need to create their own websites, often paying for the creating, maintenance, and domain; deal with any issues that arise from the IT end, train members in unit to use the site and then make sure the site is updated.
That's too much to ask for from squadrons where commanders operate with little help and put all their time and effort on the 3 primary missions.
We can't expect people to perform 100% without 100% support!
Quote from: afgeo4 on June 30, 2008, 03:41:15 AM
Can this be helped by having one website template for all units in CAP that is managed by NHQ and where all other units are subordinates?
This has worked on Wing/Group levels with squadrons as "tabs" or "sections" on the main website. Could it work on a larger scale?
I mean if we create an easy to update templated website for each unit that works within the cap.gov domain and release clear instructions on how to update information in such website and the limit of information that can be stored by each unit, wouldn't it make it possible for most units to keep up with the flow?
Right now, most units need to create their own websites, often paying for the creating, maintenance, and domain; deal with any issues that arise from the IT end, train members in unit to use the site and then make sure the site is updated.
That's too much to ask for from squadrons where commanders operate with little help and put all their time and effort on the 3 primary missions.
We can't expect people to perform 100% without 100% support!
Now there is a solution!!! I wonder if the CAP.GOV system could handle that. I can imagine a place where each unit had a standard front page and a sort of "blog" style PAO page where one could post stories.
Disclaimer: I must say that the "Statler and Waldorf" analogy was not of my original making and reflects/builds upon an old post by Robert Hartigan.
CG Aux provides web hosting services for all their flotillas if the flotilla wants to take advantage of it. There is some talk about going to some sort of required format, but nothing definite has been said.
CAP certainly could go the same route. Having CAP be the host of the web sites is very preferable. Right now if some squadron member does the site on his personal page, if he leaves there is absolutely no way for CAP to ensure that the site is shut down -- it might continue out there for years until the (former) member decides to take it down.
I don't think having a common template would solve the particular issue that started this thread. Otherwise, I'm torn -- there are some really junky CAP web sites out there that would be improved by such a template. On the other hand, there are some great CAP web sites whose overall quality would drop quite a bit if forced to use a template.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 30, 2008, 10:04:29 PM
I don't think having a common template would solve the particular issue that started this thread. Otherwise, I'm torn -- there are some really junky CAP web sites out there that would be improved by such a template. On the other hand, there are some great CAP web sites whose overall quality would drop quite a bit if forced to use a template.
No - but it would improve the overall professionalism of CAP websites (at least, in my opinion). If you look at the branches of the military (especially the Air Force) they all follow the same (if not very similar) format.
I recall a CAPTalker (McLarty - sp?) created a CAP web template that mirrored the Air Force's design. Pretty dang sharp.
IIRC, he said he was having some trouble putting it into a package with witch he could distribute to other units - so I gave up on that idea when I designed the site for my new squadron.
I wanted to make it similar to the Air Force's sites or a CAP site, and being that CAP.gov was much easier to use - I decided to go with that.
My squadron's temporary page: http://gp7.cawg.cap.gov/school/esco_home.htm
EDIT - I see that NYWG decided to do the same thing (link (http://nywg.cap.gov/)).