3:54 p.m.
So, thinking some about the content-for-contributors blog idea. I had
asked Ryan and Chris if they could go ahead with working on a Council
blog, but in the open floor meeting today there was some enthusiasm for
being broader than that.
I don't want to call such a blog "Fedora Contributor Blog" or similar,
though, because that's basically duplicating the Planet in a
centralized way — something I think we don't need.
So, I guess, multi-part question.
First, is it worth doing this _at all_, or should we wait for the
Fedora Hubs? The contributor-focused content could be presented in some
way (as feed items on the hub, say). In that case, the council blog
would be more focused to "okay, here's a place for Matthew and other
council members to put official stuff", and everything else (election
surveys, weekly graphs and charts of metrics, Fedora Objective RFCs,
etc.) could be on the Hub. But, I don't want to put so much
requirement-pressure on Hubs that it collapses before launch by being
asked to do too much.
Second, if people think it's worth going ahead with a
more-contributor-focused blog, what about reusing the Fedora Insight
name (and url, for that matter) from a few years ago? It's catchy, and
sounds somewhat insider-y (while not seeming closed-off).
What do you think?
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
7:53 p.m.
On 05/05/2015 06:54 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
So, thinking some about the content-for-contributors blog idea. I
had
asked Ryan and Chris if they could go ahead with working on a Council
blog, but in the open floor meeting today there was some enthusiasm for
being broader than that.
I don't want to call such a blog "Fedora Contributor Blog" or similar,
though, because that's basically duplicating the Planet in a
centralized way — something I think we don't need.
So, I guess, multi-part question.
First, is it worth doing this _at all_, or should we wait for the
Fedora Hubs? The contributor-focused content could be presented in some
way (as feed items on the hub, say). In that case, the council blog
would be more focused to "okay, here's a place for Matthew and other
council members to put official stuff", and everything else (election
surveys, weekly graphs and charts of metrics, Fedora Objective RFCs,
etc.) could be on the Hub. But, I don't want to put so much
requirement-pressure on Hubs that it collapses before launch by being
asked to do too much.
Second, if people think it's worth going ahead with a
more-contributor-focused blog, what about reusing the Fedora Insight
name (and url, for that matter) from a few years ago? It's catchy, and
sounds somewhat insider-y (while not seeming closed-off).
What do you think?
In my head, this blog is more of Fedora Community News -- news items
about the Fedora community, the scope of this would be like:
* Updates on upcoming events that we are holding / supporting -- FUDCon,
Flock, and others that ambassadors are attending in an official capacity.
* Reports on what happened at such events -- a portion of Flock & Fudcon
reports would also be useful for the magazine too, if they are talking
about new features in Fedora itself
* News about an upcoming election -- including interviews with the
candidates
* News about election results
* News items from the Council, FESCo, and other commitees and working
groups that pertain to the organization & running of the project --
direct output from say, the working group that impacts users, like new
features in a flavour would probably want to be on the magazine too.
--ryanlerch
6:45 a.m.
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 10:53:23AM +1000, Ryan Lerch wrote:
>more-contributor-focused blog, what about reusing the Fedora
Insight
>name (and url, for that matter) from a few years ago? It's catchy, and
>sounds somewhat insider-y (while not seeming closed-off).
>What do you think?
In my head, this blog is more of Fedora Community News -- news
items about the Fedora community, the scope of this would be like:
Sure, that can work too. Maybe "commnews.fedoraproject.org"? I guess I
was thinking some of the stuff I'd like to post isn't really _news_,
but more... pontificating. But maybe that's okay.
* News about an upcoming election -- including interviews with the
candidates
+1 for that.
* News items from the Council, FESCo, and other commitees and
working groups that pertain to the organization & running of the
project -- direct output from say, the working group that impacts
users, like new features in a flavour would probably want to be on
the magazine too.
One important thing will be promoting _potential_ Fedora Objectives, so
those get high visibility and discussion.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
9:18 a.m.
Hey,
On 05/05/2015 07:45 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 10:53:23AM +1000, Ryan Lerch wrote:
>> more-contributor-focused blog, what about reusing the Fedora Insight
>> name (and url, for that matter) from a few years ago? It's catchy, and
>> sounds somewhat insider-y (while not seeming closed-off).
>> What do you think?
> In my head, this blog is more of Fedora Community News -- news
> items about the Fedora community, the scope of this would be like:
Sure, that can work too. Maybe "commnews.fedoraproject.org"? I guess I
was thinking some of the stuff I'd like to post isn't really _news_,
but more... pontificating. But maybe that's okay.
I really like the idea of it just being "Fedora Community News" too. I'm
not really crazy about the "insight" name anymore. For the domain I'd
just make it news.fpo if you want it to be a subdomain of fpo.
~m
11:12 a.m.
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 10:18:46AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
I really like the idea of it just being "Fedora Community News" too.
I'm not really crazy about the "insight" name anymore. For the
domain I'd just make it news.fpo if you want it to be a subdomain of
fpo.
I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm afraid that people will
think that it's just another announce-list (or devel-announce). A lot
of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of "pre-news" — this
is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather than this was
_done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines of
<http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/>;,
which isn't news at all.
I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people aren't fond of it, or
worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
12:25 p.m.
On 05/05/2015 12:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm afraid
that people will
think that it's just another announce-list (or devel-announce). A lot
of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of "pre-news" — this
is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather than this was
_done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines of
<http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/>;,
which isn't news at all.
I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people aren't fond of it, or
worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
I guess I'm unfamiliar w/the Insight history. News seems fine, and "what
we're doing / working on that will soon affect you" does fit under the
"news" category.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst
jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
3:45 p.m.
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
On 05/05/2015 12:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm afraid that people
will
> think that it's just another announce-list (or devel-announce). A lot
> of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of "pre-news" — this
> is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather than this was
> _done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines of
> <http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/>;,
> which isn't news at all.
>
> I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people aren't fond of it,
or
> worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
> association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
> working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
I guess I'm unfamiliar w/the Insight history. News seems fine, and "what
we're doing / working on that will soon affect you" does fit under the
"news" category.
I don't think it's as much a negative association per se as a name
with history attached that would confuse people. It was a project
that fizzled, so to reuse the name would be confusing about how this
new site came about. -1 Insight for me too.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
4:48 p.m.
Insight seems like a good word for such a blog, but it also sounds a bit
off. It's abstract, and can be confused with an application.
It may be better to choose something more straightforward.
On Wed, 6 May 2015 at 16:45 Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 05/05/2015 12:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm afraid that people
will
> > think that it's just another announce-list (or devel-announce). A lot
> > of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of "pre-news" —
this
> > is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather than this was
> > _done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines of
> > <http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/
>,
> > which isn't news at all.
> >
> > I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people aren't fond of
it, or
> > worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
> > association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
> > working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
>
> I guess I'm unfamiliar w/the Insight history. News seems fine, and "what
> we're doing / working on that will soon affect you" does fit under the
> "news" category.
I don't think it's as much a negative association per se as a name
with history attached that would confuse people. It was a project
that fizzled, so to reuse the name would be confusing about how this
new site came about. -1 Insight for me too.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
--
marketing mailing list
marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
List info or to change your subscription:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
5:07 p.m.
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:45:43PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On 05/05/2015 12:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm afraid that people
will
> > think that it's just another announce-list (or devel-announce). A lot
> > of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of "pre-news" —
this
> > is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather than this was
> > _done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines of
> > <http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/>;,
> > which isn't news at all.
> >
> > I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people aren't fond of
it, or
> > worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
> > association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
> > working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
>
> I guess I'm unfamiliar w/the Insight history. News seems fine, and "what
> we're doing / working on that will soon affect you" does fit under the
> "news" category.
I don't think it's as much a negative association per se as a name
with history attached that would confuse people. It was a project
that fizzled, so to reuse the name would be confusing about how this
new site came about. -1 Insight for me too.
And... just so I can contribute something useful and constructive, :-)
I think what would make great sense is calling this site "Fedora
News."
Lest anyone think this is too generic, the madness hath method! The
kind of information we are proposing go into the site is *precisely*
that which used to be covered by Fedora Weekly News. We're basically
removing the "Weekly" in name as well as concept. And perhaps you
could visit it at news.fp.o -- which makes sense not only for naming
but because it is the news of the project itself.
If you think of these companion sites in terms of movies -- which
everyone should know by now I love -- Fedora Magazine is a lot like
Empire, and Fedora News is a lot like Variety. You read the first
because you love going to movies and dipping into more about them.
You read the second because you're in the business of making movies,
and you need to know things like what studio exec just hopped jobs, or
that the Writers Guild is bucking for more benefits.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
6:12 p.m.
On May 6, 2015 4:07 PM, "Paul W. Frields" <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:45:43PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> > On 05/05/2015 12:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm afraid that
people will
> > > think that it's just another announce-list (or devel-announce). A
lot
> > > of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of
"pre-news" —
this
> > > is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather
than this was
> > > _done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines of
> > > <
http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/>;,
> > > which isn't news at all.
> > >
> > > I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people aren't
fond of it, or
> > > worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
> > > association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
> > > working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
> >
> > I guess I'm unfamiliar w/the Insight history. News seems fine, and
"what
> > we're doing / working on that will soon affect
you" does fit under the
> > "news" category.
>
> I don't think it's as much a negative association per se as a name
> with history attached that would confuse people. It was a project
> that fizzled, so to reuse the name would be confusing about how this
> new site came about. -1 Insight for me too.
And... just so I can contribute something useful and constructive, :-)
I think what would make great sense is calling this site "Fedora
News."
Lest anyone think this is too generic, the madness hath method! The
kind of information we are proposing go into the site is *precisely*
that which used to be covered by Fedora Weekly News. We're basically
removing the "Weekly" in name as well as concept. And perhaps you
could visit it at news.fp.o -- which makes sense not only for naming
but because it is the news of the project itself.
If you think of these companion sites in terms of movies -- which
everyone should know by now I love -- Fedora Magazine is a lot like
Empire, and Fedora News is a lot like Variety. You read the first
because you love going to movies and dipping into more about them.
You read the second because you're in the business of making movies,
and you need to know things like what studio exec just hopped jobs, or
that the Writers Guild is bucking for more benefits.
--
Paul W. Frields
I recall that Fedora Magazine once had sections. A section for users and a
section for contributors makes more sense to me than spinning up a whole
new site. Users might be interested in content in either scope, and we
want them to *become* contributors. It strikes me as more inclusive to
make all the content available in one place, anyway, but not necessarily on
the same pages.
--Pete
6:25 p.m.
On 05/07/2015 09:12 AM, Pete Travis wrote:
On May 6, 2015 4:07 PM, "Paul W. Frields" <stickster(a)gmail.com
<mailto:stickster@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:45:43PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> > > On 05/05/2015 12:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > > I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm afraid
that people will
> > > > think that it's just another announce-list (or
devel-announce). A lot
> > > > of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of
"pre-news"
— this
> > > > is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather than this was
> > > > _done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines of
> > > >
<http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/>;,
> > > > which isn't news at all.
> > > >
> > > > I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people
aren't fond of
it, or
> > > > worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
> > > > association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
> > > > working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
> > >
> > > I guess I'm unfamiliar w/the Insight history. News seems fine,
and "what
> > > we're doing / working on that will soon affect you" does fit
under the
> > > "news" category.
> >
> > I don't think it's as much a negative association per se as a name
> > with history attached that would confuse people. It was a project
> > that fizzled, so to reuse the name would be confusing about how this
> > new site came about. -1 Insight for me too.
>
> And... just so I can contribute something useful and constructive, :-)
> I think what would make great sense is calling this site "Fedora
> News."
>
> Lest anyone think this is too generic, the madness hath method! The
> kind of information we are proposing go into the site is *precisely*
> that which used to be covered by Fedora Weekly News. We're basically
> removing the "Weekly" in name as well as concept. And perhaps you
> could visit it at news.fp.o -- which makes sense not only for naming
> but because it is the news of the project itself.
>
> If you think of these companion sites in terms of movies -- which
> everyone should know by now I love -- Fedora Magazine is a lot like
> Empire, and Fedora News is a lot like Variety. You read the first
> because you love going to movies and dipping into more about them.
> You read the second because you're in the business of making movies,
> and you need to know things like what studio exec just hopped jobs, or
> that the Writers Guild is bucking for more benefits.
>
> --
> Paul W. Frields
I recall that Fedora Magazine once had sections. A section for users
and a section for contributors makes more sense to me than spinning up
a whole new site. Users might be interested in content in either
scope, and we want them to *become* contributors. It strikes me as
more inclusive to make all the content available in one place, anyway,
but not necessarily on the same pages.
yeah, we had a discussion about this a while back, and this is where the
idea of a seperate site propagated from. The idea here is that different
sites will allow us to focus content on our two prime audiences. Even
with categories, people that really only care about user-facing content
have a larger signal-to-noise ratio with posts about elections,
community stats etc.
That is not to say that *some* of the communtity related content doesn't
belong on the magazine, it's just that not all of it should be there,
firehose style. We also get the added benefit of when we do put
community-releated content on the magazine, we can tailor it in an
outreach-style to a more focused audience -- for example a flock post
would go into more detail of flock and it's aims while a majority of
people that are already contributors already know this.
cheers,
ryanlerch
--Pete
10:52 a.m.
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 09:25:01AM +1000, Ryan Lerch wrote:
On 05/07/2015 09:12 AM, Pete Travis wrote:
>
>
>On May 6, 2015 4:07 PM, "Paul W. Frields" <stickster(a)gmail.com
><mailto:stickster@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 04:45:43PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
>> > > On 05/05/2015 12:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> > > > I'm still unsure about "news", because I'm
afraid that people will
>> > > > think that it's just another announce-list (or
devel-announce). A
>lot
>> > > > of the things I anticipate posting would be kind of
"pre-news" —
>this
>> > > > is being worked on (and maybe needs input), rather than this was
>> > > > _done_. Plus, I want somewhere to post articles along the lines
of
>> > > >
><http://fedoramagazine.org/lets-talk-about-fedora-project-objectives/>,
>> > > > which isn't news at all.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm happy to drop "insight", though, if people
aren't fond of it,
>or
>> > > > worse, have a negative association — I don't really have any
>> > > > association with it _at all_, other than I know many of you were
>> > > > working on it and then it morphed into the Magazine instead.
>> > >
>> > > I guess I'm unfamiliar w/the Insight history. News seems fine,
and
>"what
>> > > we're doing / working on that will soon affect you" does fit
under
>the
>> > > "news" category.
>> >
>> > I don't think it's as much a negative association per se as a name
>> > with history attached that would confuse people. It was a project
>> > that fizzled, so to reuse the name would be confusing about how this
>> > new site came about. -1 Insight for me too.
>>
>> And... just so I can contribute something useful and constructive, :-)
>> I think what would make great sense is calling this site "Fedora
>> News."
>>
>> Lest anyone think this is too generic, the madness hath method! The
>> kind of information we are proposing go into the site is *precisely*
>> that which used to be covered by Fedora Weekly News. We're basically
>> removing the "Weekly" in name as well as concept. And perhaps you
>> could visit it at news.fp.o -- which makes sense not only for naming
>> but because it is the news of the project itself.
>>
>> If you think of these companion sites in terms of movies -- which
>> everyone should know by now I love -- Fedora Magazine is a lot like
>> Empire, and Fedora News is a lot like Variety. You read the first
>> because you love going to movies and dipping into more about them.
>> You read the second because you're in the business of making movies,
>> and you need to know things like what studio exec just hopped jobs, or
>> that the Writers Guild is bucking for more benefits.
>>
>> --
>> Paul W. Frields
>
>I recall that Fedora Magazine once had sections. A section for users and
>a section for contributors makes more sense to me than spinning up a whole
>new site. Users might be interested in content in either scope, and we
>want them to *become* contributors. It strikes me as more inclusive to
>make all the content available in one place, anyway, but not necessarily
>on the same pages.
>
yeah, we had a discussion about this a while back, and this is where the
idea of a seperate site propagated from. The idea here is that different
sites will allow us to focus content on our two prime audiences. Even with
categories, people that really only care about user-facing content have a
larger signal-to-noise ratio with posts about elections, community stats
etc.
That is not to say that *some* of the communtity related content doesn't
belong on the magazine, it's just that not all of it should be there,
firehose style. We also get the added benefit of when we do put
community-releated content on the magazine, we can tailor it in an
outreach-style to a more focused audience -- for example a flock post would
go into more detail of flock and it's aims while a majority of people that
are already contributors already know this.
Agreed on all points. I think everyone else agreed thus far the
separate sites are a good idea so we can target the right audiences
with different sets of material. It's also a good idea in that we
target the right audiences with different sets of authors, too.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
5:13 a.m.
On 05/06/2015 07:12 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
I recall that Fedora Magazine once had sections. A section for
users
and a section for contributors makes more sense to me than spinning up a
whole new site. Users might be interested in content in either scope,
and we want them to *become* contributors. It strikes me as more
inclusive to make all the content available in one place, anyway, but
not necessarily on the same pages.
Totally agree, and argued this... but hey, what do I know about publishing?
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier | Open Source and Standards (OSAS)
jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb | http://projectatomic.io/
8:05 a.m.
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 06:13:38AM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> I recall that Fedora Magazine once had sections. A section for
users
> and a section for contributors makes more sense to me than spinning up a
> whole new site. Users might be interested in content in either scope,
> and we want them to *become* contributors. It strikes me as more
> inclusive to make all the content available in one place, anyway, but
> not necessarily on the same pages.
Totally agree, and argued this... but hey, what do I know about publishing?
This is my thinking too (even though I know less about publishing), but
since other people I *also* respect are very strongly in the other
camp, I figure, hey, might as well try it. We can always merge them
back if it isn't working.
I'm thinking I'll move 5tFTW to this new "news" site — it clearly makes
most sense there. But I'm a little worried that we're going to be short
on regular content in the Magazine — that seems like the primary
problem to address next.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
10:09 a.m.
On May 8, 2015 7:05 AM, "Matthew Miller" <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
wrote:
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 06:13:38AM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> > I recall that Fedora Magazine once had sections. A section for users
> > and a section for contributors makes more sense to me than spinning
up a
> > whole new site. Users might be interested in content in
either scope,
> > and we want them to *become* contributors. It strikes me as more
> > inclusive to make all the content available in one place, anyway, but
> > not necessarily on the same pages.
> Totally agree, and argued this... but hey, what do I know about
publishing?
This is my thinking too (even though I know less about publishing), but
since other people I *also* respect are very strongly in the other
camp, I figure, hey, might as well try it. We can always merge them
back if it isn't working.
I'm thinking I'll move 5tFTW to this new "news" site — it clearly
makes
most sense there. But I'm a little worried that we're going to be short
on regular content in the Magazine — that seems like the primary
problem to address next.
--
Matthew Miller
I've heard good things from many not-contributors about 5tFTW. Granted,
the most interested will follow that content, and everything else, on a
contributor focused site too. Your posts have always come across as a
valuable, digestible bridge between contributors and users, and that's
anecdotally supported by my interactions with enthusiast users.
This further illustrates my point - a split introduces divisiveness where
we could be promoting involvement. Take the [contributor focused] QA
series, for example - a user the learns about test days for something they
use and later sees recognition via "Heroes of QA" is going to be far more
likely to participate in QA.
Whether they actively contribute or not, people get excited about things
happening in the community and feel more like they are "part of the team"
when they are well informed. That's a feeling we should be encouraging, at
every point on the graph from casual user to enthusiast user to casual
contributor to committed contributor to community leader.
I'm not saying that it makes sense to have all content in one massive
androgynous feed, but a totally different site sends the message that we're
roping off part of the community, and I'm concerned that people will feel
excluded or just not bother to follow the content because they haven't
consciously committed to contributing .
--Pete
12:57 p.m.
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:09:17AM -0600, Pete Travis wrote:
On May 8, 2015 7:05 AM, "Matthew Miller"
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 06:13:38AM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> > > I recall that Fedora Magazine once had sections. A section for users
> > > and a section for contributors makes more sense to me than spinning
up a
> > > whole new site. Users might be interested in content in either scope,
> > > and we want them to *become* contributors. It strikes me as more
> > > inclusive to make all the content available in one place, anyway, but
> > > not necessarily on the same pages.
> > Totally agree, and argued this... but hey, what do I know about
publishing?
>
> This is my thinking too (even though I know less about publishing), but
> since other people I *also* respect are very strongly in the other
> camp, I figure, hey, might as well try it. We can always merge them
> back if it isn't working.
>
> I'm thinking I'll move 5tFTW to this new "news" site — it clearly
makes
> most sense there. But I'm a little worried that we're going to be short
> on regular content in the Magazine — that seems like the primary
> problem to address next.
>
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
I've heard good things from many not-contributors about 5tFTW. Granted,
the most interested will follow that content, and everything else, on a
contributor focused site too. Your posts have always come across as a
valuable, digestible bridge between contributors and users, and that's
anecdotally supported by my interactions with enthusiast users.
This further illustrates my point - a split introduces divisiveness where
we could be promoting involvement. Take the [contributor focused] QA
series, for example - a user the learns about test days for something they
use and later sees recognition via "Heroes of QA" is going to be far more
likely to participate in QA.
Whether they actively contribute or not, people get excited about things
happening in the community and feel more like they are "part of the team"
when they are well informed. That's a feeling we should be encouraging, at
every point on the graph from casual user to enthusiast user to casual
contributor to committed contributor to community leader.
I'm not saying that it makes sense to have all content in one massive
androgynous feed, but a totally different site sends the message that we're
roping off part of the community, and I'm concerned that people will feel
excluded or just not bother to follow the content because they haven't
consciously committed to contributing .
Perhaps Ryan could suggest an elegant design solution for this, and we
could allow him to work out in his theming draft. Either way, the
content would be one click away for a viewer. (5TFtW might be worth
cross-publishing, especially since it serves that bridging function
Pete pointed out.)
I don't think we should put too much weight on the "gap" caused by
having to click for a link on a different domain. In my experience,
few people attach that much distinction aside from those of us
providing the systems.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
3273
days inactive
3277
days old
marketing@lists.fedoraproject.org
15 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Chaoyi Zha -
Joe Brockmeier -
Matthew Miller -
Máirín Duffy -
Paul W. Frields -
Pete Travis -
Ryan Lerch