It's exciting that the Tools section allows for collaborative development of new tools, but I think we limit the depth of our potential tool resource library if we set standards that are too strict for what is and isn't a tool page.
Those who have been actively contributing to the development of Farm Hack are no doubt jazzed on using this platform to comprehensively develop new tools by collaborating online- but not all farmer inventors are going to want to delve in so deeply!
Let's remember to make space for someone who sees an interesting tool on an old timer neighbor's farm and snaps a few cell phone photos of it and gets a good description from the neighbor about how it was made. Keeping our platform open to lower commitment levels of participation is more inviting to new members of the Farm Hack community (who may delve in more deeply later), and will mean more information, even if some of it isn't completely thorough, in our library.
A group at the first Farm Hack event at MIT thought this would be a good project too. I think Chris Yoder brought up the idea there and participated in the group. That day, the team came up with some tines that they bent in a vise, using old bicycle spokes for the metal. Not an adequate replacement for the Lely tines, but a good start. Maybe we can track down some of those team members to chime in on this.
I was wondering about that too-- also, if you are logged in, you can "Add Wiki page" on the top bar, which takes you to a form to make a Wiki entry, but I don't know how you would associate that Wiki entry with a tool, or a forum, or whatever.
I think this would be pretty confusing for a typical user.
Comments
Careful that we don't set the bar for participation too high
A group at the first Farm
I was wondering about that