Current NSF Forum Feedback Thread 2

[dglow]

Before anyone else quotes the post with the Youtube video embedded, note that you can suppress NSF's auto embed feature by trimming the leading "www." off the Youtube URL.

This is great. Request: please implement a similar mechanism for Twitter embeds.

[ChrisC]

There seems to be an Internet plumbing problem clicking on the "new posts" arrow in the L2 photos threads. For example, I just looked at the Roberts Road Photos thread and, although I had looked at it yesterday and even marked  "New posts" read after I was done, looked at it again a few minutes ago and it put me on a picture from March.

I don't know if it's the cause here, but this happens all the time in "update only" threads when rogue discussion posts are moved to the discussion thread (or deleted altogether).  The resulting hole disrupts the page indexing somehow so that the "new" link doesn't go to the right place.  I see it all the time, and I just shrug and jump ahead

[ChrisC]

Can there be a forum thread, in this section, to announce features in / discuss issues with the Youtube feeds?  We need a persistent place in the NSF world for this, and thread in this section seems like the right place.

Examples of things that would be discussed in this new thread:

1. My complaint above about live commentary events that aren't archived

2: The recent launch of the McGregor Live stream!  It's exciting and we want to know more!  I eventually stumbled across some tweets that describe it, including a neat video from Adam Cuker that announced it, and the one below that explained a key feature (audio history! brilliant! now I know!).  This information really should be captured in a new thread, not this one that is really about the forum itself.

3: It would be a good place to officially state the suppress-autoembed feature mentioned a couple posts above this one.

Moderators, want to create a new thread? Proposed title: "NSF Youtube videos and live streams".   You could use this comment as the seed for it, and I would be happy to then edit it to provide a welcome mat to the thread, pointing out the purpose of the new thread, linking to the Youtube channel and live streams, mentioning the auto-embed suppression trick. etc. 

I do see that there's an existing forum section here for "NSF Live" but that seems focused on the weekly talk show.

In the meantime, I guess I'll edit the new McGregor stuff into this post ...

NEW LIVE STREAM: McGregor Live!

Announcement by Adam Cuker:


Announcement by John "Das" Galloway (starting at 1m15s) with explanation of the cryptic numbers in upper left corner:


Das mentioning the cool 15-minutes-of-audio visual timeline feature:
https://twitter.com/KSpaceAcademy/status/1521183551365992449

[russianhalo117]

Note SMF Version 2.1.0 and feature patch 2.1.1 was released to General Availability. The forum should hopefully consider making the schueduling arrangements in the near future to perform the SMF software upgrades.
2.1.0
https://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=580585.0

2.1.1
https://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=580657.0

Edited for clarity.

2.1.2
https://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=582201.0

[ChrisC]

... I have watched every one of your Youtube videos, although usually a day later.  On Sunday, you all apparently did a live Q+A session on the Starbase Live (SBL) channel.  This is the feed that runs continuously 24/7, normally has no audio or maybe ambient sound, and can only be scrubbed back a maximum of 12 hours.  Normally you spin up a separate feed for any event with commentary, which would then be archived properly by Youtube and can be watched any time.  As it stands, nobody could watch that Q+A after 12 hours had passed.

Following up on this, I just wanted to say THANK YOU to the NSF powers that be for taking last night's coverage of the first roll of an OLIT tower segment at KSC (from Roberts Road to LC-39A) that ran on the Starbase Live channel (with lots of good commentary!) and splitting it off / publishing it as its own video.  (below)

When I saw via Twitter this morning that this had happened, while I was getting ready for work, I hurriedly first tried to figure out if I could download it, and failing that scrubbed through the 12-hour archive absorbing as much as a could.  I knew that I wouldn't be able to watch it after 12 noon, meaning not tonight (now as I type this) when I would actually have time to look -- after work!  So thanks again for doing this.  Otherwise it's a shame that nobody gets to hear that fine commentary other than the people that happen to catch it in those 12 hours.

[Chris Bergin]

Also Chris. We honestly thought it would be a 10 minute drive past, so we did it in SBL not a dedicated stream. Had we known it was a two hour event with cool views, we'd have done dedicated. So after the event we decided to record what we had and put it up as above.

[Rik ISS-fan]

Is this the best topic to discuss reorganization of topics about commercial launchers from Europe?
For a reason unknown to me, the PLD space topic was relocated from the 'Commercial space flight general' to first the 'Other launchers' section and next the 'ESA launchers' section of the forum. I think this is odd.
And the relocation created a lot of (unwanted) discussion about the relocation in the topic.
I think this might have opened Pandora's box, and initiated further actions by the moderating team.

First  there are other companies from Europe with topics in the 'Commercial...' section. A part of the list:
- RFA; Rocket Factory Augsburg
- ISAR Aerospace
- HyImpulse (Suborbital, for now)
- Skyrora
- Orbex
- Pangea Aerospace
- Andoya Space launch site
- Esrange Space Center
- D-Orbit
- GOMspace
- ICEYE SAR Constellation

In the commercial section, both companies providing launch and satellite are discussed. And even new launch sites. Some European companies aren't discussed, because they are in the wrong section.

In the ESA launchers section there were already some commercial topics.
- Maia Space
- European Microlaunchers

Second PLD space is only working on their Miura 1 suborbital rocket. They still have to start work on the Miura 5 orbital rocket.

Third, the 'ESA launchers - Ariane, Soyuz @ CSG, Vega' implies it's only about launchers. The three launchers named are operated by the commercial company Arianespace. But all ESA/European institutional spaceflight activities are discussed in this section of NSF.   
Than there is the really difficult part. ESA is an independent intergovernmental organization with 22 full member states and nine cooperating states. Canada is one of the cooperating states to ESA.
The Europe is a continent containing many countries, most are European Union members, but some are not. For example the UK and Norway are ESA member states, from the European continent but they aren't EU member states. The European Union has it's own space project; EUSPA is the EU organization managing these.
How to deal with UK commercial launchers? European, ESA but Non EU.
How to deal with companies spread over different continents, Airbus D&S, Rocketlab, Reaction Engines, Spire, etz. are examples.

And the latest news (not posted on NSF jet) gives another complication. Hint: ISAR Aerospace.

I wish the moderating team good luck with reorganizing the forum.

[eeergo]

This ^^

It's also the case for non-ESA/non-US companies too (British, Indian, Australian...) that also are homeless between the Commercial and International subforums.

I'd also note that now the Artemis I launch thread has been moved to the subsection it is mentioned in (Missions to the Moon), that subforum would also need a thorough reorganization. The "HLV" section contains many threads that should rather be in Historical areas. Most Artemis threads are still there, and it seems unclear which should go where in the future. The "Mission to NEAs" section, on top of the currently-active Moon missions section, hasn't seen real-world development since two US administrations ago.

[su27k]

The latest random moves of threads between forum sections make non-sense, as Rik ISS-fan pointed out. The move of Artemis I launch thread to Missions to the Moon section also makes non-sense, because it is this forum's tradition that launch thread should stay in the launch vehicle's section, for example that's why CRS OA-7 launch thread is in ULA's section, not Orbital ATK's section. Eventually when SpaceX launches Gateway or HLS Starship, I think we should all agree it's better for those launch threads to stay in SpaceX's section instead of being moved to Missions to the Moon section.

So I think mods should revert all the moves made recently, there's nothing wrong with the original arrangement, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

[Comga]

In the interest of keeping down the noise and storage, is there some way to replace redundant posts with links, like Google Drive does?
The present irritation is several people posting about the number of launches on August 4.
By design, each of them has to repost this in each of the launch treads for the listed missions, although it adds nothing to the discussion about that particular launch. 
Whenever another launch joins the list, the post is edited and reposted, now in each thread of the lengthened list.
At present it's up to seven, so there have been a couple of dozen of these posts.
Heaven forbid that one launch gets postponed, because each polluter will need to repost a reduced list.
Meanwhile, some of us are waiting for news.......

edit: Ditto for redundant posts of Tweets that have already been posted.
Some people don't even check.  They just repost every Tweet they see on every relevant thread. 
Surely the NSF site could keep a list of Tweets and reject posts that are duplicate.

[primer_black]

With the recent traffic in the NGIS/OATK section after the news Antares-Firefly partnership, just noticed that maybe it's time to update the forum name again?

There hasn't been an 'NGIS' in NG for a few years now, it only lasted a bit after the OATK purchase.

All NG space is under Northrop Grumman Space Systems, divided between Strategic Space Systems (generally, heritage Space Park, TRW, Webb, big things, etc) and Tactical Space Systems (generally, civil and commercial, everything Orbital/Orbital ATK heritage, small gov sats like ESPASat/ESPAStar)

[ChrisC]

Do we not have the ability to tag users here, e.g. using @ syntax like @ChrisC ?  I thought we did but maybe I'm thinking of other forums.

[woods170]

Taking this to here, away from the SpaceX section where it originated:

<snip>
But one thing that has become abundantly clear to long-time NSF’ers is that the forum is taking a back seat to the multimedia juggernaut that is the YouTube channel with their tiers of paid monthly memberships. Very often, the live commentators and hosts of the YT streams say things that make it plain they don’t read the forums, or do so only sporadically, while simultaneously referring to things that are posted or hinted at exclusively in the (paid access) Discord server.


The internet evolves, content fragments and we all must adapt or get over it. But none of this is really L2-related.

Emphasis mine.

Exactly. That is the one thing I called out would happen once NSF started using Discord. It is also the one thing Chris said he would not want to happen.
But it is happening anyway. And IMO it is beginning to erode the added value of the forum section.

[Star One]

Taking this to here, away from the SpaceX section where it originated:

<snip>
But one thing that has become abundantly clear to long-time NSF’ers is that the forum is taking a back seat to the multimedia juggernaut that is the YouTube channel with their tiers of paid monthly memberships. Very often, the live commentators and hosts of the YT streams say things that make it plain they don’t read the forums, or do so only sporadically, while simultaneously referring to things that are posted or hinted at exclusively in the (paid access) Discord server.


The internet evolves, content fragments and we all must adapt or get over it. But none of this is really L2-related.

Emphasis mine.

Exactly. That is the one thing I called out would happen once NSF started using Discord. It is also the one thing Chris said he would not want to happen.
But it is happening anyway. And IMO it is beginning to erode the added value of the forum section.

I’ve heard of Discord but never used it. But it seems to be siphoning content off from a few forums and such like places these days.

[woods170]

Taking this to here, away from the SpaceX section where it originated:

<snip>
But one thing that has become abundantly clear to long-time NSF’ers is that the forum is taking a back seat to the multimedia juggernaut that is the YouTube channel with their tiers of paid monthly memberships. Very often, the live commentators and hosts of the YT streams say things that make it plain they don’t read the forums, or do so only sporadically, while simultaneously referring to things that are posted or hinted at exclusively in the (paid access) Discord server.


The internet evolves, content fragments and we all must adapt or get over it. But none of this is really L2-related.

Emphasis mine.

Exactly. That is the one thing I called out would happen once NSF started using Discord. It is also the one thing Chris said he would not want to happen.
But it is happening anyway. And IMO it is beginning to erode the added value of the forum section.

I’ve heard of Discord but never used it. But it seems to be siphoning content off from a few forums and such like places these days.

Yes, it is. Before Discord came into play, every single NSF frontpage article about SLS was based on information first released in L2. Nowadays, quite a few of NSF frontpage articles about SLS are NOT based on information released in L2, but stuff that first appeared on the Discord server. And that goes for other subjects too.
As such, Discord has begun to diminish the added value of L2. And that is IMO not good, given that the L2 subscriptions cover a substantial part of the cost of running and hosting NSF.

[chopsticks]

Yeah, I must say since the YouTube channel started, there has been so much more push towards "support us!" by tiers of membership, merch, superchats, etc. I mean, I appreciate the content, but sometimes it all comes across as being a bit greedy. My 2c.

I also wonder how much the live commentators read these forums.

[russianhalo117]

Yeah, I must say since the YouTube channel started, there has been so much more push towards "support us!" by tiers of membership, merch, superchats, etc. I mean, I appreciate the content, but sometimes it all comes across as being a bit greedy. My 2c.

I also wonder how much the live commentators read these forums.

They are using the YouTube provided membership tiering and chat systems and they have to work the YT algorithm to get returns. To provide what they want to stream they have to use the partnership/creatorship programme to provide a broadcast quality channel. Memberships was a progression milestone unlock. Greedy  as you call it or aggressive tactics as I call it is what YouTube wants their creators channels to be. It's all about the various algorithms. Some creators push it to accelerate the ladder climbing while others are more laid back thus they climb the rungs of channel growth and visibility much more slowly. To provide decent broadcast quality videography and audiography in addition to photography is expensive. They have to start somewhere in order to acquire higher quality gear for newer resolutions and technologies. The average person is not aware of the cost of rack units, mic packs and life limited microphones and cabling just to name a few.  I personally do not agree with nor support the current YouTube business model.

[PJ_IN_FL]

Hello Chris and other Moderators,

Having lurked in the EM Drive Development forum for about 5 years, I enjoyed the discussions on the measurement techniques and challenges, even more than the theoretical discussions, that generally went over this EE's head.

As the forum slowed down considerably over the past two years, I haven't checked in for a while, However, I just did take a look and found the forum has been locked since last November, without any explanation or notice.

Is an update planned to provide closure to the forum topic so future lurkers like myself don't leave puzzled over the sudden halt?

Regards,
PJ in (sunny) FL

[mn]

Taking this to here, away from the SpaceX section where it originated:

<snip>
But one thing that has become abundantly clear to long-time NSF’ers is that the forum is taking a back seat to the multimedia juggernaut that is the YouTube channel with their tiers of paid monthly memberships. Very often, the live commentators and hosts of the YT streams say things that make it plain they don’t read the forums, or do so only sporadically, while simultaneously referring to things that are posted or hinted at exclusively in the (paid access) Discord server.


The internet evolves, content fragments and we all must adapt or get over it. But none of this is really L2-related.

Emphasis mine.

Exactly. That is the one thing I called out would happen once NSF started using Discord. It is also the one thing Chris said he would not want to happen.
But it is happening anyway. And IMO it is beginning to erode the added value of the forum section.

To add to this: a good amount of work was done to make the regular forum mobile friendly to the point that it is usable on my phone and I don't have to use the mobile theme.

But the work is not complete, there are still many issues using the main theme on mobile, and all work was dropped in this regard.

[dglow]

Taking this to here, away from the SpaceX section where it originated:

<snip>
But one thing that has become abundantly clear to long-time NSF’ers is that the forum is taking a back seat to the multimedia juggernaut that is the YouTube channel with their tiers of paid monthly memberships. Very often, the live commentators and hosts of the YT streams say things that make it plain they don’t read the forums, or do so only sporadically, while simultaneously referring to things that are posted or hinted at exclusively in the (paid access) Discord server.


The internet evolves, content fragments and we all must adapt or get over it. But none of this is really L2-related.

Emphasis mine.

Exactly. That is the one thing I called out would happen once NSF started using Discord. It is also the one thing Chris said he would not want to happen.
But it is happening anyway. And IMO it is beginning to erode the added value of the forum section.

To add to this: a good amount of work was done to make the regular forum mobile friendly to the point that it is usable on my phone and I don't have to use the mobile theme.

But the work is not complete, there are still many issues using the main theme on mobile, and all work was dropped in this regard.

Actions speak louder than words, and the quality-of-site improvements’ requests-to-completed ratio is demonstrably one-sided; just read upthread. Painful to admit, but it seems best not to get any hopes up and perhaps just be content that the web fora continue to exist. Recognize that many of the overdue forum improvements long predate the rise of NSF’s YT channel.

It’s easy to see that live coverage is where the focus, viewership, and revenue lies. And good on NSF and its crew for the success in growing the channel as they have.

But the disconnect between the YouTube commentary and information in the fora can be quite jarring. It would seem to benefit all if it were someone’s role to feed information from the fora up to Discord and on-camera crew. Perhaps this is happening. Among the most authoritative on-camera commentary I’ve heard of late has come from Philip Sloss. And surprise, Philip is among the best writers for NSF. Perhaps psloss may serve as a role model for the rest of the streaming crew.