> Also what about future program maintenance and such, I can
> certainly say that the last thing I want PLUG doing with its time is
fixing
> security holes in its php infrastructure.

In a system as complex as Nuke, security holes definitely do begin to crop
up, there's no argument on that.  This is part of the reason a custom
system, with ONLY the features we need would be beneficial in that there are
fewer parts that can break/be exploited.

> The "freeing up time argument" for PLUG organizers works because right now
> very little makes it to the website. Only updating a calendar and 2 pages
of
> information is easy, but how about an IF page and a Classes page, and a
> member blog type page (say for those who went to LW and events like it), a
> support page they displays problems solved on the mailing list so others
can
> benefit, status pages for the 50 other ongoing projects and so on. How
about
> a credit page to illustrate and highlight the important contributions of
our
> members.Well now that sounds like a lot of work.

It may be my own lack of in-depth knowlefge on Nuke, but I don't really see
Nuke filling the requirements of all of those shoes too easily.  At least
not without some pretty heavy custom modifications.

A custom system on the other hand, would require a single sql table for
contributions, a single table for storing info on classes and IF's.  To
build a knowledgebase on the other hand, which could hold previous
issues/resolutions (which, coincidentally, is exactly what i'm building for
supportbeam.com) is substaintially more work.  That may sound like a strike
against the custom idea, but in reality, I have yet to find any solutions in
Nuke that can fullfil that particular need adequately.  This becomes even
more evident when you target the content at 'day users'.  While Nuke tosses
in a LOT of extra clutter, that nobody ever uses, such as 'print this
article' buttons.  (That one little extra icon alone isn't so bad, but when
multiplied exponentially, and added to a lot of other things, then it
becomes a major usability issue that the average joe just does not want to
deal with.)

> To say that only a few people will actually contribute fails because it
> seems clear to me that this is because of the high barriers to
contribution.

I'll second that in a heartbeat.  Ther easier collaboration and organization
are, the more people will be willing to contribute in meaningful ways and
advance the goals of PLUG.

> If we can't make something like this work then what are we advocating to
> people, to use mailing lists and IRC?

Yet another reason that ANY CMS would be beneficial, as mailing lists, IRC,
and meetings are great, but they can not be as effective as necessary when
dealing with 'day users.'

Adam Rader