I would love to try it. The problem is, I never did a project of this size, so I don’t know if I am overconfident. I think that when I wrote “year”, that already compensated for the planning fallacy (my first reaction was something like “three months”). Or, maybe I spend the whole year doing this, and at the end we find out that the project is ready and works, but maybe it is much slower than the original version. Etc.
What would be a good solution? Maybe first build a smaller prototype, measure the speed, and decide whether to move on. But this careful iterative programming does not seem compatible with the kickstarter approach.
So, uhm, maybe the small prototype first, and then the kickstarter?
That of course depends on how much that “other existing forum software” is complicated, and how many features need to be changed to fit our needs.
To answer your question, it is not “obviously better”; you just have to make a probabilistic estimate. Sometime people make the mistake of reinventing the wheel, when a good (or even superior) version already exists. But sometimes also people spend a lot of time investigating existing options, only to find out that all of them have some major problem. (And this process can also cost a lot of time, and when it fails, you are left empty-handed at the end.) I have seen both of these situations in real life. The “don’t reinvent the wheel” part gets very popular on internet, but people underestimate that even when a solution is already available, it can take a lot of time to learn how to use it properly (that means, not just use the software as an ordinary user, but also as an administrator, and even to be able to customize it; those are an order of magnitude more complex tasks).
I guess a reasonable first step would be to set a deadline, for example a month or two, to explore the existing alternatives. (But you have to set a deadline, because there will always be yet another obscure alternative you have not thoroughly examined yet.) Maybe a month would be enough, if we consider the fact that LW already runs for a few years and it was not replaced by an existing superior alternative.
I know even less about this sort of project than you do. My level of ignorance is shown by taking your claim that you could do it in a year at face value and only thinking about whether you could raise the money.
A test project sounds very reasonable. So does thinking about where you could go for competent advice about the difficulty and the risks of the project turning out badly.
I would love to try it. The problem is, I never did a project of this size, so I don’t know if I am overconfident. I think that when I wrote “year”, that already compensated for the planning fallacy (my first reaction was something like “three months”). Or, maybe I spend the whole year doing this, and at the end we find out that the project is ready and works, but maybe it is much slower than the original version. Etc.
What would be a good solution? Maybe first build a smaller prototype, measure the speed, and decide whether to move on. But this careful iterative programming does not seem compatible with the kickstarter approach.
So, uhm, maybe the small prototype first, and then the kickstarter?
Is rewriting everything from scratch obviously better than forking some other existing forum software (e.g. Discourse) and adding features?
That of course depends on how much that “other existing forum software” is complicated, and how many features need to be changed to fit our needs.
To answer your question, it is not “obviously better”; you just have to make a probabilistic estimate. Sometime people make the mistake of reinventing the wheel, when a good (or even superior) version already exists. But sometimes also people spend a lot of time investigating existing options, only to find out that all of them have some major problem. (And this process can also cost a lot of time, and when it fails, you are left empty-handed at the end.) I have seen both of these situations in real life. The “don’t reinvent the wheel” part gets very popular on internet, but people underestimate that even when a solution is already available, it can take a lot of time to learn how to use it properly (that means, not just use the software as an ordinary user, but also as an administrator, and even to be able to customize it; those are an order of magnitude more complex tasks).
I guess a reasonable first step would be to set a deadline, for example a month or two, to explore the existing alternatives. (But you have to set a deadline, because there will always be yet another obscure alternative you have not thoroughly examined yet.) Maybe a month would be enough, if we consider the fact that LW already runs for a few years and it was not replaced by an existing superior alternative.
I know even less about this sort of project than you do. My level of ignorance is shown by taking your claim that you could do it in a year at face value and only thinking about whether you could raise the money.
A test project sounds very reasonable. So does thinking about where you could go for competent advice about the difficulty and the risks of the project turning out badly.